My Challenge to you: Prove there is a God!

[angellous_evangellous]

'We confess that God exists divinely as the Trinity: three persons in one.

'


pleeeease, will you stop with that!:bonk:[/QUOTE]
It's not likely. The Trinitarian confession is what gave Christianity its shape, and we have considered a non-Trinitarian theology of God as heresy for almost 2000 years.

 

[jewscout]

'We confess that God exists divinely as the Trinity: three persons in one.

pleeeease, will you stop with that!:bonk:

well i don't

G-d is One

"Shema Yisrael, Adanoi, Elohaynu, Adanoi Echad"
Hear O Israel, HaShem is Lord, HaShem is One.

 

[jewscout]

heh.. just thought this was funny analogy to make...
Does that mean we can go on without knowledge of God?
God might be there, but we arent supposed to worship...

BTW: Does love exist? I dont believe it does. Love is a concept, an idea. Much like god. (...but dont tell my girlfriend I said that!)

Jewscout is correct though. Just because God cannot be proven doesnt me he doesnt exist. However, it does mean we shouldn't believe in God until shown otherwise - but we should remain open to the possibility. Faith is nothing more than a desperate longing.

you see that...i'm "correct"

of course i'd disagree w/ you on the "desperate longing" and "G-d might be there, but we aren't supposed to worship..." parts but that's just where we will inevitably disagree...
such is life...

 

[michel]

you see that...i'm "correct"

of course i'd disagree w/ you on the "desperate longing" and "G-d might be there, but we aren't supposed to worship..." parts but that's just where we will inevitably disagree...
such is life...

I of course agree with you Jewscout; I think this describes perfectly the difference between a believer and a non believer; the non believer needs proof; which, of course makes sense.

 

[ThisShouldMakeSense]

'

we have considered a non-Trinitarian theology of God as heresy for almost 2000 years.

actually, you didn't.
The New Encyclopædia Britannica : "The creed was unknown to the Eastern Church until the 12th century. Since the 17th century, scholars have generally agreed that the Athanasian Creed was not written by Athanasius (died 373) but was probably composed in southern France during the 5th century. . . . The creed’s influence seems to have been primarily in southern France and Spain in the 6th and 7th centuries. It was used in the liturgy of the church in Germany in the 9th century and somewhat later in Rome."
now i'm not good at maths, but even i know that doesnt add up to 2000

 

[The Black Whirlwind]

the force is easy to prove. we are all the force, and the force is all of us. it is the life force, and it drives us all in our daily lives i also have an interesting story about my force fish, and here it is:

one day, i asked, "force, prove to me you exist by making fall a small jade fish from my ganesha statuette." so i put my small jade fish on my ganesha statuette, high on my alter, and left the room for a couple of minutes. after the time was up, i came back into my room, and, miraculously, the jade fish was on the floor, with no provocation, because there was no gust of wind (my windows were closed), and there was no tremor. the force exerted its will on the fish, and MADE it move onto the floor. thats my proof.

 

[Pah]

I don't know that God is from evolution, I suspect he is, but love certainly is. Love is learned behavior that selects for the survival of the species. It is born out of the interaction of mother and child when the mother "loveingly" interacts with the child. The emotional reaction of the infant is a quid pro quo in the satifcation of physical needs.

There was a study mentioned in another thread where infants were raised with only the "basic neccessities" warmth, food, water, and hygene but no other contact with the infant. While looking for that study on the net, I noticed several sites that mentioned a condition called "failutre to thrive" (FTT), One factor in FTT was an emotional neglect of Children. FTT leads, today, to poor physical and physcological developement. Had love been given, the incidence of FTT is significantly lower. In the study mentioned in another thread, half the children died though their "needs" were supplied.

 

[DeepShadow]

There was a study mentioned in another thread where infants were raised with only the "basic neccessities" warmth, food, water, and hygene but no other contact with the infant. While looking for that study on the net, I noticed several sites that mentioned a condition called "failutre to thrive" (FTT), One factor in FTT was an emotional neglect of Children. FTT leads, today, to poor physical and physcological developement. Had love been given, the incidence of FTT is significantly lower. In the study mentioned in another thread, half the children died though their "needs" were supplied.

Okay, but where did the infants get their need for love?

Wouldn't it have been simpler for evolution to have selected infants that didn't succumb to failure to thrive? In terms of energy and time "wasted" in loving children, that would be the more efficient and simpler alternative.

 

[Ziroc]

If God does not exist, how can the world be in such perfect balance?

 

[anami]

The reason i'm asking this is because, judging by the posts and threads on this site, no one is able to conclusivly prove that there is a God. everyone has a counter arguement to make.
Just mass confussion as for as i can see. I know they say you must have faith, but can anyone give me more? So please prove the existence of any god. that they are alive and doing stuff now.
So no saying 'here's a god, look it's made of wood! See god exists!'. And here's the hard part, prove it without quoting Holy books that say he exists. ie. becuase the bible says so. have fun!

i define God as a personification of the mathmatical object that is the wave function.

Do people personify the divine into a GOD or Gods, yes. So does God exist, yes at least to all of those people.

And to nonbelievers it exists because it is that God thing people are always talking about and therefore exists at least in languge or concept.

 

[Pah]

Okay, but where did the infants get their need for love?

Wouldn't it have been simpler for evolution to have selected infants that didn't succumb to failure to thrive? In terms of energy and time "wasted" in loving children, that would be the more efficient and simpler alternative.

I only brought the subject up because love was mentioned in a way that was justification for God. If you want to discuss this further perhaps, as a favor to me, you could start another thread (the evolution forum is a good idea) to get into the details. Thanks

 

[Nick Soapdish]

Let me clarify.
Love and God are ideas. They do have effects even though they dont exist.. because its the idea of their existance which affects people.
For example, Utopia is an idea, a concept, a fantasy. It does not (and cannot) exist. Yet people still pursue it and are affected by it.

I am having trouble following you here. "War" is an idea. Does war exist? What about "music"?

I am not suggesting these things are the same as the "idea" of God, I am just trying to understand your distinction between what exists and what does not.

EDIT: I think you may be bordering on a nihilistic point of view

 

[Nick Soapdish]

the force is easy to prove. we are all the force, and the force is all of us. it is the life force, and it drives us all in our daily lives i also have an interesting story about my force fish, and here it is:

one day, i asked, "force, prove to me you exist by making fall a small jade fish from my ganesha statuette." so i put my small jade fish on my ganesha statuette, high on my alter, and left the room for a couple of minutes. after the time was up, i came back into my room, and, miraculously, the jade fish was on the floor, with no provocation, because there was no gust of wind (my windows were closed), and there was no tremor. the force exerted its will on the fish, and MADE it move onto the floor. thats my proof.

I know this is off topic, but just out of curiousity, what do you think of metachlorians? In my opinion that ruined Star Wars mysticism.

 

[Pah]

I know this is off topic, but just out of curiousity, what do you think of metachlorians? In my opinion that ruined Star Wars mysticism.

Yeah it is off-topic. You should do that in another thread

 

[jewscout]

I don't know that God is from evolution, I suspect he is, but love certainly is. Love is learned behavior that selects for the survival of the species. It is born out of the interaction of mother and child when the mother "loveingly" interacts with the child. The emotional reaction of the infant is a quid pro quo in the satifcation of physical needs.

There was a study mentioned in another thread where infants were raised with only the "basic neccessities" warmth, food, water, and hygene but no other contact with the infant. While looking for that study on the net, I noticed several sites that mentioned a condition called "failutre to thrive" (FTT), One factor in FTT was an emotional neglect of Children. FTT leads, today, to poor physical and physcological developement. Had love been given, the incidence of FTT is significantly lower. In the study mentioned in another thread, half the children died though their "needs" were supplied.

i see what your saying bob...cool info by the way...
i wonder what a study would turn up about a devout and religious person having something happen to them that caused them to loose their faith and belief in G-d overnight? going from, say, a devout christian to denying G-d's existance and saying either He is dead or was never there to begin with...it's gotta have some sort of repercutions don't you think? especially coinciding w/ a traumatic event, say the death of a child or other loved one...
just a thought i could be wrong...
i think the point i was trying to make was that love is something abstract, yet most would not deny its existance...a belief in a deity is something abstract as well
for those who believe in both just because you can't hold "love" or "G-d" in your hands doesn't make them less real...

 

[Pah]

i see what your saying bob...cool info by the way...
i wonder what a study would turn up about a devout and religious person having something happen to them that caused them to loose their faith and belief in G-d overnight? going from, say, a devout christian to denying G-d's existance and saying either He is dead or was never there to begin with...it's gotta have some sort of repercutions don't you think? especially coinciding w/ a traumatic event, say the death of a child or other loved one...
just a thought i could be wrong...
i think the point i was trying to make was that love is something abstract, yet most would not deny its existance...a belief in a deity is something abstract as well
for those who believe in both just because you can't hold "love" or "G-d" in your hands doesn't make them less real...

There are so many things abstract and yet influence behavior. Flight or fight is an example of one instinct. that derives from evolution. You can't point to but it sure operates to keep the species alive. Sex drive is an other.

I think the repercutions incured in species "fitness" depend not so much on God as the social establishment of religion. What matters, in my mind, is the association with others of like thoughts that increase chances of survival. Spirituality may or may not be selective but its expression is - no matter how it is acquired.

 

[Tawn]

I am having trouble following you here. "War" is an idea. Does war exist? What about "music"?

I am not suggesting these things are the same as the "idea" of God, I am just trying to understand your distinction between what exists and what does not.

EDIT: I think you may be bordering on a nihilistic point of view

War exists as an idea used as a description of a series of events which follow a particular criteria. The criteria is fairly well established but not precise.. not everyone would consider the 'cold war' to be a war... ..and where is the line between a fight between two people and a war? Can two people 'war' with each other?

Music is also an idea, but likewise it is also a description for a pattern of sounds. This is even morew fuzzy, because when is a collection of sounds music, and when is it just noise? Its all about perspective. For instance many people dont consider the vast majority of rap music to be music.

Nihilistic? You betcha!.. yes its almost nihilistic but not exactly that.

 

[Tawn]

Perhaps from your point of view. However, in Christian theology, God is a divine person, not just an idea. Ideas cannot do anything in and of themselves - but the prophets confess that God has acted in history in the salvation story of Israel and in the person of Jesus Christ, and even today in the life and ministry of the Church. Although existentialism is promoted by some Christian theologians, it is by no means widely accepted or a part of the Christian creed. We confess that God exists divinely as the Trinity: three persons in one.

My point is that trying to demonstrate the proof of Gods existence by showing how God affects peoples actions is essentially pointless. God-real or God-as-idea, they would effectively do the same to people.
Evidence that God had a hand in something which an idea of God could not inspire would be good evidence though.

 

[Tawn]

>>>Just because God cannot be proven doesnt me he doesnt exist. However, it does mean we shouldn't believe in God until shown otherwise - but we should remain open to the possibility.
Shouldn't? Should? From where do you get these shoulds and should nots?

Well then lets believe in everything that has no evidence to suggest its validity. Im not after 100% proof, thats not possible - but beyond reasonable doubt would be reasonable and appropriate. If not lets believe in a Pantheon of Gods and A Monetheistic God and spirits and tooth faeries and giant marshmellow men...
I know it sounds like im taking the mick - but im trying to get a serious point across. If you accept one belief without evidence then you have to accept all of them. Non-belief is simply the default (and rational) assumption one must make in the light of no evidence.

 

[Nubialy]

The very structure of debates makes it difficult for people to change their view without losing face. It is a contest to see which side can win. Emotions rise, strong words are used, dogmatism takes over and calm, logical reasoning cannot function. Often both sides leave as they came—each side convinced that it is right.