Okay, Let's Cut To The Chase!

[POI]

Dear Christians of all flavor(s),

I trust it is no surprise there exists a populous here, which lay claim to 'atheism', 'deism', or maybe other... In a nutshell, for me, this ultimately means I do not believe any such claimed Christian God exists - trying though as I might.... Which-is-to-mean, I was raised in a Christian house hold. However, after much study, I cannot get myself to belief such a claimed agent actually exists. Chalk it up, ultimately, to the topic of 'divine hiddenness' I guess...?

It is also evident there exists devout 'Christians' in this arena, of all flavors, who may feel they are 'fighting the good fight'; by defending their belief(s)/faith/rationale in the assertion of the existence to the "Christian God".

That being said, I am laying down the gauntlet, so-to-speak... Some here, as well as outside of here, are as sure as anything, that not only does God exist, but the Christian God! Well, I politely disagree. Meaning, I don't believe the "Christian based" assertion/claim.

I can't imagine this request will be anything new. Nor, can I imagine that I will encounter any new sort of enlightenment. But, being this is a rather large and important topic; I will continue to search, optimistically, that there exists some sort of 'concrete evidence(s)' to demonstrate that not only a God exists ---> but also the Christian God.

For Debate:

Please demonstrate the mere existence of the Christian God?

[AquinasForGod]

I think different people come to believe or return to belief for different reasons. It is usually a set of many things that add up. Sometimes it is one big event like crashing your motorcycle, and the doctors are surprised you survived. While being out, Mary visits you and tells you amazing things, then guides you to the priesthood, like Father Stu.

It might be the person as a God experience and that brings them to God in general, then upon trying to find who is God, for many different reasons they come to Christianity.

They might come back to Christianity because they were raised that way. So when they find God again, they just return to their core faith.

In the case of Lee Stroble he says he found Jesus by trying to disprove the resurrection.

Have you ever considered the argument from the best explanation for why there is anything at all? There are two possible answers, something eternal or spontaneous existence, which is something came to exist for no reason.

An infinite regress would not be a third option because the whole infinite chain either came to be or is always.

In case you are anyone is interested in that argument - https://www.freelymeditate.com/single-p ... ing-at-all

Ed Feser was an unbeliever for many years as he was teaching Philosophy. He is a Ph.D philosopher. He was asked to teach Aristotle and I think Aquinas or some others. In doing so, he challenged himself to take it seriously for his students. To present their ideas in the best possible light, but that required him to look deeper into their ideas. In doing so he was slowly convinced of Aristotle's metaphysics and his argument for God and then of Aquinas. This took time. He wasn't trying to find faith. He just wanted to present the philosophy as best as he could. He is not a Thomistic Catholic.

Some came to the faith by reading Ed Feser's book, "Five Proofs for the Existence of God."

Someone that recently read my argument for God, emailed me and thanked me for bringing him to God.

[POI]

Someone that recently read my argument for God, emailed me and thanked me for bringing him to God.

I have just created a new topic ""Bringing Atheists to God". Please enlighten all of us.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to POI in post #412]

I shared it in the post above your own.

[POI]

[Replying to POI in post #412]

I shared it in the post above your own.

Then by all means, please respond to the new topic and present your argument.

TY

[TRANSPONDER]

I think different people come to believe or return to belief for different reasons. It is usually a set of many things that add up. Sometimes it is one big event like crashing your motorcycle, and the doctors are surprised you survived. While being out, Mary visits you and tells you amazing things, then guides you to the priesthood, like Father Stu.

It might be the person as a God experience and that brings them to God in general, then upon trying to find who is God, for many different reasons they come to Christianity.

They might come back to Christianity because they were raised that way. So when they find God again, they just return to their core faith.

In the case of Lee Stroble he says he found Jesus by trying to disprove the resurrection.

Have you ever considered the argument from the best explanation for why there is anything at all? There are two possible answers, something eternal or spontaneous existence, which is something came to exist for no reason.

An infinite regress would not be a third option because the whole infinite chain either came to be or is always.

In case you are anyone is interested in that argument - https://www.freelymeditate.com/single-p ... ing-at-all

Ed Feser was an unbeliever for many years as he was teaching Philosophy. He is a Ph.D philosopher. He was asked to teach Aristotle and I think Aquinas or some others. In doing so, he challenged himself to take it seriously for his students. To present their ideas in the best possible light, but that required him to look deeper into their ideas. In doing so he was slowly convinced of Aristotle's metaphysics and his argument for God and then of Aquinas. This took time. He wasn't trying to find faith. He just wanted to present the philosophy as best as he could. He is not a Thomistic Catholic.

Some came to the faith by reading Ed Feser's book, "Five Proofs for the Existence of God."

Someone that recently read my argument for God, emailed me and thanked me for bringing him to God.

Someone may have been bamboozled into Theism (if not Biblegod -belief) by the First Cause argument but that won't work on those who actually understand the argument and know that is misinterpreting the logical agnostic position into a Gnostic one, which is obviously illogical. Dressing up illogic in impressive verbiage, whether scientific or philosophical, is still illogic. It is the same pointless posting we get wanting to discuss the internal logic of theological dogmas and doctrines. That is not the 'Chase'; why we should believe any of it is.

The fall out of the First cause argument is of course 'Which god?'. And that is one of the long list of questions that get dodged. The only answer I ever got (as I recall) was 'There is only one God', and to 'And which one is that?' I got no response.We know what it will come down to - appeal to the Bible which is what 'The Chase' really is and not First Cause, or even evolution - denial. And not jut the Bible because (under pressure) the OT will be abandoned and 'Jesus made everything new', will be the reason why Christianity rather than Judaism (never mind the case for Islam) is the 'Chase', and that comes down to the gospels and specifically the truth of the resurrection. That is the real Chase and the only meaningful one, and 'Cosmic Origins is a rhetorical swindle to use their best gap for God as a springboard for the leap of Faith to Jesus. I have even seen it done with a Genesis - denial animation film with a supposed atheist being turned with some evolution - denial (with thanks for bringing him to God, no doubt) and asking 'what do I do now?' "Repent and take Jesus as your Lord and Savior". There's the leap of Faith and the swindle of the Kalam apologetic right there. Friends, don't fall for it.

[DaveD49]

[brunumb]

[Replying to DaveD49 in post #416]

It's a shame you spent so much time and tired yourself out writing down all that so-called evidence because none of it actually requires there to be a god.

[POI]

[DaveD49]

[POI]

Note that I did not say that these were the ONLY ones in each category; there are far, far more. All of the ones I did include do show major evidence for the existence of God. Perhaps the two biggest are the argument of the necessity of a first cause, also referred to as the "Cosmological Argument" which actually dates back to Aristotle, and the scientific argument of the exact fine-tuning of the universal constants to not only allow for a universe to exist but also to allow for life to exist. This is something which is acknowledged by virtually every acknowledged scientist no matter what their faith or lack thereof. There is also no getting around the "Miracle of the Sun" which was witnessed by approximately 70,000+ people and was reported in newspapers around the world.

I politely ask again. Which one do you want to address the most? This is not my first rodeo. I'm aware there exists many 'arguments'