6000 years of history

[RonE]

6000 years of recorded history, it seems to me that if there were gods (or God), by now we would all know. Science has found no place for god in any hypothesis explaining the laws of nature.

We are presented with two alternatives, either there are no gods or they are hiding, playing tricks on us trying to test us, but really why would such powerful beings need or want to do that. Occam’s razor points us to the obvious answer, simple… no one is there.

Let’s move out of kindergarten and make believe, let’s feed the poor and starving, let’s put hate and war out of business.

What say you?

[ttruscott]

.

Christianity claims HE only hides HIS presence from some of us. Not everyone is devoid of the evidence.

How are those privileged to see the evidence selected? Could it be that they are those who already BELIEVE and are prone to accept what they are told (or what they read) about "gods?"

No sir, they are accepted because of their own free will decision to have faith in YHWH's claims without proof, a hope (without proof) that He was who HE claimed to be and would reward their faith as HE said HE would...

This can't be proven because it is a spiritual matter and the spirit can't be proven by material means any more than music proves elephants....it is meaningless to question the spiritual as provable or not.

Since the spiritual cannot be proved, it should not be presented to others as being truthful and accurate (because it cannot be substantiated).

If you saw a bridge wash out and ran back down the road to warn drivers and was told to stop because you had no proof with you that the bridge was actually out for them to believe you, would you stop or would you wave your red lantern and yell till you were hoarse??

There is no evidence to support that god, and in the case of the christian god he is said to answer prayers and to take other positive actions which if true would be observable. Since we do not observe any evidence of these activities we can assume that he is not there.

The fact that people do not 'have' any evidence may mean

Perhaps you overlooked an obvious #5 – that there IS NO EVIDENCE to present – nothing more than conjecture, opinion, hearsay and unverifiable tales (ancient or modern) in which religionists purport to KNOW about "gods" or "afterlife" or "supernaturalism."

Conjecture #5 is only good for you, remember I have the proof I need...<shrug>.

In other words, lack of evidence is still not a proof there is no evidence...

Exactly. Therefore, to those who claim there IS evidence of "gods" I ASK for evidence upon which to make a reasoned, intelligent, sound decision.

The evidence is the Bible itself, the life of Jesus and the anecdotal evidence of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit by converts... all this is openly available but what you need is the proof that this evidence has real and true value to you which you haven''t recognized yet...

Seeking out the proof of this evidence is what you should do and what I did for many years... I rejected God's reality except when everything went wrong and then I knew who to blame and who to hate for making my life so miserable. I finally gave up fist fighting with GOD and...hey.

This means that I am not the one to ask for proof of the evidence but you must seek GOD - I know this sounds preachy but it is the truth as a Christian sees it. We are not the ones to bring you the proof, that is above our pay grade I'm afraid.

Peace, Ted

[ttruscott]

BTW, I agree with Sagan a lot, too. I especially agree with his child like wonder at the universe and his delight in exploring it. I don't agree with his atheism, but I don't think he was being a coward or deceitful in any way when he expressed it.

That quote I put up pretty much makes him and agnostic: “To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed.�

This discounts the contention that GOD gets in touch with people and lets them know of HIS existence and divinity... but a very good policy until then!

Peace, Ted

[ttruscott]

... How many times must I say it, I agree that a revealed God is unreasonable.

What is the intellectual impediment to believing that GOD selectively reveals HIMself to those who have chosen by their free will to put their faith in HIS claims but not to those who rejected HIS claims in away that He warned made them eternally evil???

Peace, Ted

[ttruscott]

We humans are a rather nasty lot, all things considered.

You don't say?

I wonder why that is...It couldn't possibly be because some higher power *intentionally* created us that way.

IF He is loving and holy this can't be - all evil must have been created by one of us... If HE is not, then who cares, we are all doomed!

Peace, Ted

[ThePainefulTruth]

[Replying to post 42 by agnosticatheist]

3. If God is testing us to find out who will accept him and who will reject him

That wouldn't be the test, which is indicated by God not being evident. We're unable to tell whether God exists or not. The test is how well we respect each others rights, and what kind of code we come up with for our personal actions and how well we adhere to it. And if there is a hereafter, God wouldn't judge us, we would judge our own selves.

[ThePainefulTruth]

... How many times must I say it, I agree that a revealed God is unreasonable.

What is the intellectual impediment to believing that GOD selectively reveals HIMself to those who have chosen by their free will to put their faith in HIS claims but not to those who rejected HIS claims in away that He warned made them eternally evil???

The intellectual impediment is a total lack of evidence (other that the hearsay of fallible, corruptible humans) that any god has ever revealed itself to anyone, or that there has ever been a supernatural event in this natural universe. What you're saying is equivalent to, "for you to believe, you first have to believe." This also goes against the proposition that God would give us the ability to reason, and then require that we discard that gift.

[Wordleymaster1]

We humans are a rather nasty lot, all things considered.

You don't say?

I wonder why that is...It couldn't possibly be because some higher power *intentionally* created us that way.

IF He is loving and holy this can't be - all evil must have been created by one of us... If HE is not, then who cares, we are all doomed!

Peace, Ted

Fallacy.
If God didn't create evil He allowed it to be created. One is just as evil and wrong as the other. Either He created it (evil) or didn't prevent it from being created (evil).
It's all nice and stuff to think God can do no wrong and that God can't create evil attributing it all to us, but that's not the case if God is truly all powerful. If He's not omnipotent, what's the point?

[RonE]

[Replying to post 30 by dianaiad]

Sorry, but I don't see that my views of Carl bear at all on the subject of this post.

[ThePainefulTruth]

[Replying to post 55 by Wordleymaster1]

If God exists, we were created (evolved) in this universe with self-aware free will, which is the ability to choose between good and evil. Evil is nothing but our choice to violate the rights of others, and good is the choice not to. It took God 13 billion years to create us with that capability, when, ostensibly, God could do anything else instantly.

[RonE]

[Replying to post 35 by ttruscott]

Christianity claims HE only hides HIS presence from some of us. Not everyone is devoid of the evidence. This can't be proven because it is a spiritual matter and the spirit can't be proven by material means any more than music proves elephants....it is meaningless to question the spiritual as provable or not.

The same can be said of the dragon in my garage, only a few of my friends can see him as I can. But, I understand that when I make that claim I am not presenting any evidence and that it is unreasonable for me to expect my claim to be treated seriously.