Are there good reasons to believe that a god exists?

Jashwell · Post by **Jashwell** » Sat Jun 14, 2014 1:14 pm

"Are there good reasons to believe that a god exists?"

Doesn't seem like much preamble is needed, but expect this largely to be filled (if at all) with arguments in favour of the existence of a God and counter-arguments. (Because the question is not "Are there good reasons to believe that a god does not exist?"). Though if you do think you have a good argument that shows it is reasonable to believe God does not exist, that is also valid.

This question comes up a lot in other threads where various classical arguments (e.g. ontological, axiological, cosmological) have been given in those threads.

If possible, try not to shotgun debate by raising lots of arguments at once. One sound argument should be sufficient.

jcb · Post by **jcb** » Thu Jul 17, 2014 5:47 pm

[Replying to post 326 by DanieltheDragon]

I usually do say 'there appears to be contradictions"

Sorry for the absent mindedness. Being involved with 3 and 4 different things does create oversight.

I do say there are no contradictions in KJV. They only appear as contradictions and are clarified by other verseS.

jcb · Post by **jcb** » Thu Jul 17, 2014 5:57 pm

[Replying to post 328 by DanieltheDragon]

Because if one of the two can in no way be true the word of God is not worth the paper it is written on.

mwtech · Post by **mwtech** » Thu Jul 17, 2014 6:06 pm

jcb wrote: [Replying to post 328 by DanieltheDragon]

Because if one of the two can in no way be true the word of God is not worth the paper it is written on.

So maybe it isn't then. You don't have to make a contradiction go away just so the bible can continue to mean something to you. And I certainly don't have to pretend there is no contradiction just so I can believe the bible has a special meaning. There is a contradiction. There is no way the Bible is infallible and contains contradictions. I can't trust it if I have to figure out myself what is true and what isn't. If that's the case I'll just cut out the middle man and leave religion out entirely.
Of course, as a believer, you don't want there to be a contradiction, but that isn't an argument to support that there are actually no contradictions. It is just wishful thinking.

jcb · Post by **jcb** » Thu Jul 17, 2014 6:16 pm

[Replying to post 332 by mwtech]

'I can't trust it if I have to figure out myself what is true and what isn't. If that's the case I'll just cut out the middle man and leave religion out entirely.'

If this is how you feel and intend on continuing a negative view of the Bible, you should forget everything related to religion. If you do, I hope you take this advice: Make every effort to be the best person you can be with the morals you have.

DanieltheDragon · Post by **DanieltheDragon** » Thu Jul 17, 2014 6:27 pm

jcb wrote: [Replying to post 328 by DanieltheDragon]

Because if one of the two can in no way be true the word of God is not worth the paper it is written on.

*DING DING DING WE HAVE A WINNER*

sorry for the silliness but in all honesty that is the point. Parts of the bible can in no way be true, hence why I and others don't take it to be "worth the paper it is written on"

It is not a negative view of the bible parts of the bible I find really interesting and as a whole it is the collective mythology from which much of our culture stems from. The native Americans have their mythologies the Europeans have both Norse and greek mythology. These are all culturally enriching mythologies much how I view the bible. However, it does not present itself to being take as truth.

As far as forgetting everything relating to religion how are you in any position to dictate this to me or mwtech? There are lots of things relating to religion that don't include the bible and don't require a belief in the supernatural for instance examining mythology. I take it you studied some greek mythology in school?

mwtech · Post by **mwtech** » Thu Jul 17, 2014 6:31 pm

jcb wrote: [Replying to post 332 by mwtech]

'I can't trust it if I have to figure out myself what is true and what isn't. If that's the case I'll just cut out the middle man and leave religion out entirely.'

If this is how you feel and intend on continuing a negative view of the Bible, you should forget everything related to religion. If you do, I hope you take this advice: Make every effort to be the best person you can be with the morals you have.

And I would give the same advice to you. And everyone else on the planet. I don't just insist in having a negative view of the bible. I see the contradictions for what they are. I'm not going to bend over backwards to make them go away just so I can feel a false sense of protection while I sleep. I'm sorry, by I can't make myself believe something I think to be untrue.

Zzyzx · Post by **Zzyzx** » Thu Jul 17, 2014 7:36 pm

.

jcb wrote: I do say there are no contradictions in KJV. They only appear as contradictions and are clarified by other verseS.

"They only appear as contradictions" to those who wish to believe the bible is true and accurate in what it says -- and who are willing to change word meanings, blame translations, or otherwise excuse blatant contradictions to maintain their confidence in the bible.

kenblogton · Post by **kenblogton** » Thu Jul 17, 2014 8:39 pm

Danmark wrote:
kenblogton wrote: Stark gives the reason why humans came to believe in gods: because they believed the gods were vital to their survival, and he says they abandoned the initial high gods because they were too demanding and invented more human-like and much less demanding polytheistic gods. The initial gods were more like the real thing, the more easy-going gods were invented.

It is obvious that the creator of the universe does not need meat or anything. So why such stuff in the Bible?
The Bible's purpose is to communicate what God expects of humans. Since it was written for fairly primitive humans, it contains anthropomorphisms to help primitive folk relate to God and to better understand what God expects.
kenblogton
So God kind of 'dumbed it down' for our primitive, 'strong back - weak mind' ancestors like Thales and Pythagoras [6th Century BCE]. But we are so much smarter now God can give us new revelation. If true, it sounds like an argument for the Mormon doctrine of continuing revelation.

The Bible is the standard against which all subsequent revelation is assessed. I believe God speaks to all people in different ways; people's choice is whether or not to listen. The book by DavidPaul Doyle WHEN GOD SPOKE TO ME: The Inspiring Stories of Ordinary People Who Have Received Divine Guidance and Wisdom published in 2010 by Career Press of Franklin Lakes, NJ gives many illustrations of God communicating with people, some of whom were attempting to communicate with God and some where God initiated the communication.
kenblogton

kenblogton · Post by **kenblogton** » Thu Jul 17, 2014 8:46 pm

[Replying to post 281 by Zzyzx]

Zzyzx said "It appears as though personal conceptions of gods are influenced by what people hear and read (opinions of others) about gods. Do you disagree?"
kenblogton replied: I believes the most powerful source of conceptions about God are through personal experience.
The book by DavidPaul Doyle WHEN GOD SPOKE TO ME: The Inspiring Stories of Ordinary People Who Have Received Divine Guidance and Wisdom published in 2010 by Career Press of Franklin Lakes, NJ gives many illustrations of God communicating with people, some of whom were attempting to communicate with God and some where God initiated the communication, as in my case.
Doyle concludes the people who received these communications from God experienced the unconditionally loving nature of God (237) when most were going through tremendous hardship or pain. (237) He says Whether they were in the throes of despair just prior to hearing from God or in a quiet and peaceful state of mind, each person exhibited a similar set of mental and emotional qualities in their actual moment of hearing. These common qualities included, among others, desire [to hear from God], willingness [to open their heart and mind to God], surrender [to what is: their attachments and agendas, their expectations and painful desires], and not knowing [the truth, how to proceed, what was best, thereby acknowledging perhaps there might be a better way] " four key traits that helped to open each one to an experience of God. (237-239)
kenblogton

Zzyzx · Post by **Zzyzx** » Thu Jul 17, 2014 9:45 pm

.

kenblogton wrote:
Zzyzx wrote:It appears as though personal conceptions of gods are influenced by what people hear and read (opinions of others) about gods. Do you disagree?
I believe the most powerful source of conceptions about God are through personal experience.

I disagree.

Personal emotional / psychological / mental episodes can be highly influential. However, the priest class has had thousands of years to perfect techniques and tactics used to convince people that they have special knowledge of supernatural entities and events. Ancient religion promoters are still revered for their opinions and stories about "gods."

Without being taught or indoctrinated with such influences, or with different teachings / indoctrinations people "experience" different "gods" or "god events."