God, The Unverifiable
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 жов 2024
- God is something that you can't comprehend or prove. Might as well worship him, right?
This is fair use.
Merch: shop.spreadshi...
Twitter: / hiiththefirst
Discord: / discord
Responding to: www.huffington...
If god(s) is beyond our comprehension, how can believers claim to understand it well enough to explain it to us?
faith man faith, hehehe. They have faith that they can explain it to us or to them self. Faith is their keyword in life.
Kos Eighty always been my favorite aspect of it all! Even faith in itself has crazy hurdles to jump over.
" to quote the immortal sage Homer Simpson, what if we picked the wrong religion? Every time we go to church we're just making God madder and madder."
They don't know what they are talking about
If God is incomprehensible, how does anyone know anything about God or what He's done? If God is incomprehensible, God is literally nonsense.
ha ha ha ...how does a living cell just come from nowhere to form a very complex human like you...think, think , think...you can not exist by evolving slowly....eg...if your body reached the stage of having a head how does the head develop the eyes since it has never seen light....just use your head to see that high intelligence is needed create a living creature like you...
Parton Nyirongo
they only thing i want to say after reading your totally dumb and ingorant post is go get education.
Parton Nyirongo
eyes developed before a "head" was present as we know it. as for how does a cell appear out of no where, its been observed for proteins to form without the aid of a biological molecule. enough of these gather in the right way and life can develop in the form of single cell organisms (like bacteria). from there, evolution happens and eventually theres complex organisms made of many cells working together. very simple, and very logical. given enough time, these proteins will always form life. its not a question of if, but when. and before you use the tornado in a junk yard idea, its inaccurate. this isnt all of them jumping around at once and landing somewhere, they are simply drifting around in water and collecting. now for you, how is there 2 different creation stories in genesis? its not more detail, the order things are done in changes. this means the bible cannot be 100% accurate, because it contradicts itself. if 100% of it isnt accurate, how can you be sure any of it is?
@@MrPSN2011 just because you don't know how something came to life/exist, doesn't means that it was created by some supernatural spirit/God. over all, you're putting all you're believe in one book written by some random guys. come on.
God won one wrestling match and retired.
He was banned, because he cheated.
Cuz he touched private parts?
how is beyond existence different from non-existence?
How could it affect the world yet we can't test it?
If God is incomprehensible how Can anyone be Certain what he wants from us?
The concept I don't accept is that people choose to believe or not believe. Belief is a consequence of understanding something's nature and the evidence supporting it ... not a decision. Case in point, choose to believe that you can fly.
.
Theistic faith is based on an emotional response, it's a narrative that promises everything but doesn't actually deliver anything. Oh sure, they get the feels and the community but whenever asked to present something real all it provides are excuses and dodges.
Drakonis .Imperial Your comparing something that humans are incapable of doing to something that is clearly not answerable
Exactly ... human beings are incapable of choosing what they believe. You can't just wake up and decide to believe in god anymore than you can decide not to. So yes, I provided an example that is physically impossible and easy to prove. You can't simply choose to believe even if you are delusional, that's not how our brains work.
.
And if I'm reading your response correctly, why is the question of theism "clearly not answerable"? If someone makes a claim, specifically a knowledge claim, then they should be able to provide evidence to support said claim. It is only in the realm of the supernatural, psychic powers and gods that this simple rule no longer applies. Apologist since the dawn of religion have basically used empty words as "proof" that their chosen god exists ... and not one of them has ever shown a single piece of actual evidence to support their claims. That's why I'm an atheist ... I looked at the nature of the claims and found out that they had no evidence to support them and realized (not chose) that I didn't actually believe in gods. Now if evidence were to be presented then I'd have to reassess my thinking ... but as far as Yahweh goes they've had over 6000 years to find something and so far they've produced absolutely nothing.
One problem that I picked up on was the claim of "choosing to believe". When it comes to rational thought one cannot choose. I cannot choose to believe that I can fly regardless of how much I want it to be true. I am a rational thinker. I don't believe in a god because the evidence for such a god is lacking. That is not a choice on my part. Show me the evidence and I will change my mind, I will have to.
subductionzone 😾 Well put! My thinking mirrors yours. As Professor Richard Dawkins put it, we are all atheists when considering every other manifestation of a deity but he and I go one step further to include the Abrahamic deity as well. I am still waiting for the many religionists on UA-cam to provide verifiable evidence for their peculiar version of mythology . . . Still waiting . . .
Sir Meow The Library Cat The issue I see here is the label "atheist". We need to stop thinking about it in these terms. One doesn't run around claiming to be a non- astrologer as Sam Harris puts it. These labels only divide us.
+Troll Hunter
Just because I don't run around telling everyone I'm an a-astrology-ist doesn't mean I'm not one. You're failing to grasp the basic concept of words and definitions. An atheist is someone who does not believe in any gods. A non-theist. Anyone who fits the definition is an atheist, regardless of whether they "use the label" or not.
And no, I've heard plenty of stories of religious people getting angry, it even being illegal in... I think it was Saudi-Arabia... just for stating that you don't believe god exists. Regardless of whether you call yourself an atheist or not. So it's not the word that divides us, but the actual real thing that is described by the word.
theuncalledfor The point is. You don't go around calling yourself a nonastrologer, now do you?
theuncalledfor And words are descriptive. They have usages. Which can change.
"Miracles stopped existing when we found out we could video tape them." Haha! It's funny 'cause it's true!
Not really...
The ant analogy doesn't even make sense in this context. If an ant could never comprehend a human's existence, because we are above it's comprehension, what reason could it have to worship or believe in it? If God cannot affect us in any meaningful way, we can ignore that idea too.
The ant analogy is even worse than that. Ants cannot fully comprehend my nature, but they certainly know I exist if I interact with them. Does he think ants crawling up my foot imagine they are flying?
In the beginning there was stick, he said “let there be science” Ravioli 1-1
meatballs, 4-12;
"and the spaghetti monster that befell the sky spoke unto the people bellow, "take great care'th of mine children". he then left, and never returned to Itali"
The problem is also that if we some day get evidence for that God exist for we found something in orr universe was created why then shall we worship him and follow a specific religion?
The example I often use is that we someday find out that we are in a computer simulation and realize that this simulation may been created by a programmer in a dimension we can not see, shall we then worship him and create a religion based on the ancient codes of FORTRAN?
good points Rex. Incidentally, FORTRAN is still used pretty regularly in Civil Engineering. And for such an old program, free compilers are still hard to find.
Non physical yet a "He"?
dude, don't misgender god.
These all sound like the arguments of people who know they are wrong...
It's so surprising that people see god as a physical being when he created beings in his own image according to a story.
That is an insult to the followers of Zeus, they, or at least a lot of them believed in Zeus as an ethereal God, not as a superhero or a physical being.
Also, they made an argument based on people being unable to know the mind of God, people cannot know God, God is so unverifiable and outside of our comprehension that we are physically unable to comprehend God at all.
But why not take that to the obvious conclusion? if we cannot comprehend God, why do theists think we comprehend God? If we cannot know God, why do theists think we know God? If we cannot know the mind of God, why do theists think we know what he wants?
If there is "a God so beyond human comprehension as to be nothing but dubitable" then why should anyone believe what humans have said about them? This sounds a lot like deism, there is/was a God out there, but no one can sense them and they have no detectable influence over the world. Which is fair enough, a fictional God is indistinguishable from an God that can be neither observed nor inferred. But how does one infer or know of a God when the God is, by definition, unable to be observed or inferred?
lookin good, hiith! love the earrings too!
I didn't notice... Hope you like them ^^
I absolutely HATE when Christians justify God's shitty actions as "he works in mysterious ways" or "he's just beyond human comprehension"
Hiith has holy ears, bow down to there almighty power of sparkling.
Have a great new year
This guy sure seems to know a lot about something which we can't comprehend at all. Does he ever get to the point of how _he_ knows all this, while everyone else gets it wrong?
Anyway, nice job, hiith.
Congratulations on your sub numbers, they seem to have shot up recently.
All the best to you and yours for 2018.
Great video as always! I liked the stream aswell.
😳 Having written so much to show the incomprehensible nature of ‘God’ the author then appears to be very well informed of such an invention to an astonishing degree! How about having your cake and eating it? There is no end to religionists attempting to justify the unjustifiable. Kind regards from 🇬🇧
If this god is so incomprehensible (unbelievable), why does the author believe?
maingun07 something being incomparable such as time or gravity before scientist could comprehend it does not mean it's not believeable
Your sentence was incoherent. Please restate.
Comprehend means understand, not believe. Different concepts. You can believe things you don't understand (well, maybe not you personally, but at least some people can), and you can understand things you don't believe.
Now you might argue that if you don't understand something, you can "believe" it on the word of someone you trust or think of as smarter than you, but you can't "truly believe" the claim itself and that would be a fair point. But it all depends on how the word "believe" is used by the person saying it, which means you're arguing against their usage of language rather than about the contents of their claims.
Fair enough. I have a hard time believing in what I can't comprehend. Or maybe it's comprehending what I don't believe? At any rate, given enough evidence I may be swayed. A good example is quantum uncertainty. I "believe" what is happening in the double slit experiment, because it's been replicated millions of times. I remember doing it in high school.
However, declaring something "incomprehensible", especially for something that one has failed to provide any evidence for, sounds like a weasel tactic designed to get the audience to stop thinking about the validity of a claim. Scam artists have used similar techniques for millennia.
+maingun07
_'However, declaring something "incomprehensible", especially for something that one has failed to provide any evidence for, sounds like a weasel tactic designed to get the audience to stop thinking about the validity of a claim.'_
Yes, that is true. I'm not arguing for the existence of god, I just thought it sounded like you meant incomprehensible and unbelievable meant the same thing, so this is completely beside my point. So, I have absolutely no problem with admitting you're right: most likely, in this case, it's just a shitty excuse to mask how dumb this specific god concept really is.
Keep the amazing work man.
5:25 "God does not, technically speaking, exist." That's it. You heard it here, folks. Debate's over. Good job, everyone.
Hiith, I bet this guy wouldn't be 'in love' with his idea of god if he didn't live in a comfortable, first world country! lol Love and Peace
But also pain and suffering can make people leave certain religion. For they keep calling for God to come and save them, and God still seems nowhere to be found.
and you're proving that point?
How can you be in love with a being you can't even begin to understand?
I think you might have been a little too hard on this author. The true gist of his article can be summed up quite succinctly like this: I cannot let go of my faith, despite the continuing secular explanations of the Universe, therefore I present the idea that my god is in fact nothing more than the laws of physics.
I really love this argument. "God exists. You just can't prove God's existence because God does not exist."
According to the old testament god's spirit "visited" earth so....
According to Christianity, god did exist as Jesus. god already proved he exists by manifesting in the natural world as Jesus. So this article is telling me that this god is incapable of doing that? Well, this article just proved that the bible and Christianity are fake then. Or, this is jut another explanation of an all powerful god that doesn't seem to be able to get his act together enough to get his believers all on the same page. This is a major reason why I am an atheist.
Love with out evidence is stalking and that’s illegal
[Fair analysis of situation] therefore [random assertions]
Sounds like Ancient Aliens to me.
_"The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament sheweth His handiwork."_ *-Psalms19:1 KJV*
If ever a verse betrayed the minds who penned the bible. They really believed looking up was looking into heaven, so "obviously" there is a dome that prevents the heavenly waters from drowning us all, again.
That whole facet of the story makes me wonder why early sailors feared sailing off the edge. Wouldn't they WANT to go looking for where the firmament touches the ground?
This article is very similar to my own final considerations about God before losing my faith in favor of reason. Apologetics exponentially expand until the apologist realizes their unbelievability and their argument falls apart. It's often a part of the shedding of indoctrination.
God as he described it is just a force of nature (or meta-nature or something). It creates because it has no choice. My dog has more free will. It is as close to being non-existent as a thing can get.
I think I had a twitter argument with that guy once, he wasn't making any sense then either.
What does it say about the person who loves the God described in the Bible?
wondering the same thing myself Eric.
I'll show them verses of some pretty bad stuff, but they just use "context" excuse and move on. They never explain the context, just like they never explain "kind" for an animal category.
But they know in back of their mind that the info I'm providing them is accurate. And for some, it will gradually lead them to emancipation.
"The truth will set you free, but first it will make you miserable. " James A. Garfield
They are told from a very young age that no matter what God does it is good, so even if it seems bad, God has a good reason for it, even if we don't understand it. But if you read the Bible without that bias, his villainy becomes clear.
Eric Taylor...the same Bible banned in California?
If god is beyond our perception then how could we even get the idea that he exists? I think we can trace where belief in god originated, it's all man-made bullshit. It's not beyond our comprehension to understand where belief came from.
An entity that doesn’t even have to exist in order to be omnipotent - Karen Armstrong, among others in history, concocted this very convenient »nothing« in her book »The History of God«.
To quote Dana Carvey as the SNL Church Lady: »Well isn’t that special?«
This is like Aristotle's idea of ideal forms. Forms were abstractions that gradually fell out of favour because they don't add anything meaningful to our understanding and were an unnecessary complication.. The definition of god is rapidly becoming the same as the definition of something that doesn't exist, other than as an abstract notion.
I think we need to start pushing there being a difference between a god and a creator. Most of this guys seem to think that showing that a creator start what is here (not that i think they have) is the same as showing there a god.
They want to worship someone who was just given power to be a god. Just like a rock star. "I love you!" It's only natural to consider themselves last in life.
There was a Christian ad for Intelligent Design on your video! Hahaha
We cannot understand infinity, what/ why life is....nor do we know why there are so mant gods we worship these days.
There is existence and non-existence. This writer says that god does not exist. Then he is equivalent to non-existence. Glad we cleared that up. these pseudo-intellectuals always claim that their god cannot be known by mere mortals, that he (it is always a He) is beyond our comprehension. Hmmm, then how does this yahoo know what he is spouting? Epic fail.
Locutus D'Borg...no. There's "eternal" nonexistence.
Noticed the earrings immediately. I like! Excellent video, BTW. I need to send a theist friend of mine to your videos. We went to the same church back in the 80s. He's distraught that I am now an atheist. I'm getting tired of explaining myself. His arguments are not convincing, at all.
So, that guy is essentially saying that God have NO WILL.
Then, we can infer that God have no purpose. In a way, that god could be an unthinking, will-less, conscienceless, purposeless Universe. Then, god is just another name for Universe. This would be coherent with the concept that god is everywhere at once.
I'm 61, and I've heard similarly indefensible arguments for god over the decades. It's all complete nonsense. The only supposed 'historical' evidence for god is in religious texts, and those are entirely anecdotal accounts. The idea of believing in a deity that, by definition, cannot possibly be proven, where even the anecdotal accounts of religious texts cannot be used to support the belief, implies an urgent need for psychotherapy.
not finding of God's existence isnt a proof that he doesnt exist.... if i killed someone but there was no prrof or evidence that i did so ... does that mean i didnt kill ??? ofcourse no
and the proof God's existence is everywhere but u are just denying it .... search for tge truth before it is too late uncle and may Allah guide u
When you're in love evidence does not matter? I beg to differ. I could be head over heels someone, if I run into evidence that they have committing a horrible crime, say, child molestation; I would immediately report them to the proper authorities. I might be less inclined to accept the notion but if actual evidence were presented, I wouldn't shrug it away, 'love' or not.
God is inconceivable, that's why no one can know that god is real or what is attributes are, apart from this one crazy theological troublemaker...
How does he know what god is or isn't if god isn't conceivable, and how does his inability to conceive it mean that others cannot do so? I mean, if a thing being conceived by others is inconceivable to him, why can't god be that?
This argument is so full of holes I think I'm gonna make my next Swiss cheese sammich with it.
To play devil’s advocate here, there are many things we believe that are beyond human comprehension. Relativity, quantum mechanics, string theory, etc. i bet you believe in black holes, even though the concept of a singularity where all the laws of physics we know of don’t apply.
Being an apologist is being an apologist for lies: no science is involved!
I'm still waiting for a yes or no on the debate
He's basically admitting that no one actually knows what's meant when they refer to something as a 'god,' so how is it even defensible to say that any gods exist? We don't even know what 'at least one god exists' actually implies about the world or any hypothetical beings within it. He's basically arguing in favor of theological noncognitivism, which is super bizarre from a Christian.
How does David J. Dunn know what he has written is true? The details of his explanation of what God is (or isn't) must come from a reliable source if he believes they are true. There can be only one truly reliable source in this case, but the author clearly states that God doesn't exist and is beyond our comprehension. If he can not comprehend God, how can he possibly say that Atheists and Christians have got it wrong?
I don't refer to myself as an agnostic atheist. I reject claims put forward regarding the existence of a God until any evidence that can be tested and demonstrated suggests that it's a valid claim. I don't put forward the claim there is no God either. For what reason would I make another counter claim I can't demonstrate or provide evidence for either? Shifting the burden of proof and asserting a claim is true without being able to demonstrate it is a mistake. This seems to aggravate some atheists whom insist that a stance on God should be taken. I'm not fence sitting, I just don't care to join either group that are making claims they can't demonstrate is definitely true.
There is a ruler to the universe that believes that nothing exists outside of his hut.
If God doesn't choose between options. Then God does not have the very free will that Christians claim we humans have. He IS the very robot that Christians say we (humans) would be if we had no free will.
God is starting to sound a lot like Azathoth right now
If something is incomprehensible and unverifiable then there is no rational reason to think that this thing is either true or exists.
I like how Matt Dillahunty puts it: we have many people going around claiming to be able to detect the undetectable.
I often say that I am a Biblical Atheist. I don't know anything about God, but the "God" in the Bible and other similar texts is clearly unverifiable and therefore nonexistent by ordinary criteria.
About God (if exist), well, step up to the bar and let us see ya... waiting.... waiting.... waiting...
Would you eat a baby - well, that's an interesting question - plenty of animals will eat their own young, and I can fully believe we would too if we weren't the dominant species. A human baby, is a huge resource drain; From national Geographic "Indeed, mother bears, felines, canids, primates, and many species of rodents-from rats to prairie dogs-have all been seen killing and eating their young. Insects, fish, amphibians, reptiles, and birds also have been implicated in killing, and sometimes devouring, the young of their own kind." Why would we be any different?
"God is not the sort of being that can never be shown to exist."
The bible disagrees.
'God' supposedly showed up and spoke to people, wrestled and grabbed a dud by the goolies.
ᗩ乙Ꭵᖇᗩᖺᗩᙓᒪ ....the same Bible banned in California?
Very impressed with your logic and reasoning skills. There seems to be a trend to agnostic as being more sophisticated and less antagonistic, but do we find a lot of people willing to take a firm position on the easter bunny, the tooth fairy, vampires? Then why would this be any difference. Granted, I do not say "I KNOW there are no gods" - exactly like I say i dont know there are no werewolves, but i feel pretty solid in my conclusion and you're going to have to produce some really good evidence for your cliam. I feel like the agnostic position is exploited by faith claimants to say - well, we're both making equally valid claims about reality. No, you're not.
You do an awesome job of presenting your subject and analysis of data and facts.
For me, our complex body, digestive system, heart, brain, reproductive system, eyes and ears all in correct proportions. The sun and the moon, night and day, the food to eat, fishes, fruits, vegetables, rain, feeling love, hate, sorrow.... fingertips, all These enough to convince me that there is a god.
Plus let me add that, from the Christian perspective, God's proof of his existence is based on the filling of a particular need in man. Sure, one could argue that why doesn't he just crack open the sky or do something dramatic and prove his existence, but the message of Christ is that he wants to live within each of us and for us to have communion with him on that level.
Bunmi Adefisayo....ever ask yourself why this god would just be granted power over anything? You just want a master to worship. We all parish into eternal nonexistence.
Hello. I find your videos very interesting and challenging to me as a Christian. I'd like to ask though, what indication do you require to show that God exists? There can, and most likely will never be a scientific test to show that God exists (In my opinion). The best we can do is use logical reasoning to argue for the possible existence of God. People who convert to Christianity don't necessarily do so because a sound, logical argument was put forward to them. They would have done so because a deeper, more "spiritual" hole has been filled. The argument for God's existence is, at best, a nice intellectual exercise
Noticed the earrings right away. Definitely stand out.
Santa was easier to believe in than God. At least there was evidence, albeit phony, of him.
There is an easy way to unproof god:
When you never tell a kid anything about religion god aso, it will not believe in him!
Believing is always given by the parents, the priests and the community, not by self thinking!
Otherwise all would believe the same, just because this not happens, it is clear that god is nothing regular, it is teached!
"So what god does is by his choice even though he has no choice in the matter..."
God has a moral code, which is incomprehensible to us because god is incomprehensible, and this theological troublemakers knows exactly what that moral code entails...
The ridiculousness goes to 11. It's not even funny.
Rev JR...so what gave your god power over everything else? You just want a man to worship.
you have to transcend duality or walk on water to meet god. Then there is no need for beliefs.
basing my comments on your video response alone, as i have not read the article. it would seem to me that the author was trying to reconcile the idea that humanity has a habit or need to develop a concept of god with an arguement that because this happened. that various cultures over the millenia do this, is an argument to for the existance of god. and is rejecting all other possible conclusions. but that the author is unable to bring the argument together in any meaningful way.
I like your argument. it's so intellectual , you're very smart. I think about God & Religions all the time.
Why do i know that there is no god, and all religions are wrong?
When all say, we are the right ones, we know the truth, all are wrong!
The idea of a god is so ridiculous that it does not warrant any argument. All so called proof supporting his existence is either hearsay or man made. Why would a god even need a bible? just install a copy of his word into the minds of every living thing or show himself and walk among us using his powers to stop the crazies. In fact one word from him could remove all sin. But of course that would be too easy and the religious criminals would lose their funding.
nah he is saying that faith is confirmation bias. at least that's how i understood him
you might want to take a look into Jordan B. Peterson's lectures about the psychological/symbolic meaning of the bible scriptures. from what I can tell he's got a quite rational approach
To say "I believe there is no God" is a conscious choice. Then, on what do you base your choice: evidence, logic, faith, or a combination of the three?
If evidence, then what positive evidence is there that disproves God's existence?
There can be no such evidence since evidence is physical in nature (evidence is an effect and/or result of something in reality). How could evidence disprove the existence of God who is, by definition, the creator of reality and separate from it?
(I am defending the Christian God as revealed in the Bible).
Testimony is admissible in court as evidence, but no one can rightly testify that God does not exist.
If logic, then what logical proof do you have that negates God's existence?
At best, logic can only disprove theistic proofs. Disproving theistic proofs does not mean there is no God. It only means that the proofs presented thus far are insufficient.
Logic can be used to disprove theistic evidences that are presented. Negating such proofs is not a refutation of all possible proofs since no one can know or present all possible proofs of God's existence. Therefore, negation of proofs does not disprove God's existence.
If there were a logical argument that proved God did not exist, it has not yet been made known. If it were known, then it would be in use by atheists. But since no proof of God's non-existence has been successfully defended by atheists, we can conclude that thus far there are no logical proofs for God's non-existence.
If faith alone, then the position is not held by logic or evidence and is an arbitrary position.
If by a combination of evidence, logic, and/or faith, then according to the above analysis, neither is sufficient to validate atheism. A combination of insufficient means does not validate atheism.
For someone to believe there is no God is to hold that belief by faith since there is no evidence that positively supports atheism, and there are no logical proofs that God does not exist. It is, after all, virtually impossible to prove a negative.
I love it when I see parts that I saw in the livestream xD
You cannot prove the existence of God, a priest said once: It's like a cartoon trying to prove the existence of the cartoonist. And that's by design, ultimately it will always be left to choice, your choice to believe or not, your choice to accept that something exists beyond the physical world or not. That tiny door will always be open because there are some questions we will never be able to answer while being in this world, like what was before the big-bang...who created the laws of physics, what is consciousness, what happens after death... these are not something you can prove with science as science will always rely on what the physical world provides. So you are left with choosing and that's a very important thing: choice for yourself.
Think about that, think about what would happen to this world should God be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Your choice? Your free will? Your reason to live? GONE! You know what comes after, you would know what happens if you do this or you don't do that, you know who the judge is, how He will judge you and thus what's the point of choosing? Why live? If you know beyond a reasonable doubt there is eternal life after this, all you want is to get there. Why advance? Why evolve? Why does the universe even exist? So that some pretty little lights explore it (our souls, after death)?
At the same time proving He doesn't exist produces similar results. Religion gives a lot of people hope, a way to redeem themselves and to many it's what keeps them going. Throw away that and you got a whole lot for problems, with the risk of dear I say it: extinction. While a lot of people did do bad things in the name of God (and that's on them, reading into books like it was written by God himself...don't believe that) there were far more people that believe in the goodness of God and managed to save us from our selves.
I really don't have a problem with what you or anybody else believe in is as long as it does not hurt other people. But when you ask for proof and critic the response of others, ask this: How can someone prove that He exists and we keep our free will, our current way of like? For better and for worse... or How can we keep our sanity after showing God does not exist? Because if you think the entire world would just be like you: oh, ok, God doesn't exist - let me NOT do just whatever the hell I want because of man-made laws!...check again.
Not surprising a theists mindset is so convinced that god is the only thing keeping them from being detestable.
I wonder what this guy thinks is the reason God created humans that are unable to comprehend it.
The essence of faith is to trust that there is a god, while acknowledging that all the evidence has been produced by us. ☆ Existence must have a Cause, they say, because things have cause, This is a circular argument. Such thoughts lead to a headache. In the end, it is a matter of personal opinion, which is mutable ☆ you have argued well, congratulations!
Reality exists , it's not a question , it's a fact
All I gotta say is yes I believe god does exist but all because there isn't any evidence doesn't mean we shouldn't push forward and try to get any evidence read the bible or go to a church and just sit down and listen to it if you don't like it that's cool it's your choice to believe in God, he gives you choices in live he doesn't just give you the right thing that's why he doesn't show any evidence just try at least once to worship him and you will either be moved by it and continue or not because you just don't want to, it's all up to you guys he does exist but he's just not gonna give it out to you
In my opinion just because the Bible or other holy books don't make complete sense doesn't mean a creator higher intelligence almighty God does not exist. The evidence I look to is the existence of living beings, male and female. The extreme complexity of all living things. I think there is a great case for the existence of God. Just my own opinion. But based on my own experiences and what I've seen in my life God doesn't seem to be anything like what people think, not even close. Did this God actually come to Earth in the form of Christ? I would say it's possible and that there's a pretty good chance it really happened. Put it this way I wouldn't be surprised at all if it turns out to be true.
Still waiting for a yes or no
i think i will stick with the Abrahamic god exist only in the mind of hes followers. he is a fictional god. doesn't mean he doesn't exist, just means hes fiction.
When I look at the complexity of nature I find it difficult to believe it emerged by chance. I can accept the theory of on-going evolution, but not its explanation for the beginnings of life. At the same time, this belief that life was the creation of a complex spiritual being seems just as far fetched. It seems more realistic that life was brought to Earth, most likely as seeds (figuratively speaking) than life as we know it today. But that does not address its creation, nor does it matter, as it would be the source of that life that would need to offer a reasonable explanation.
Of course, there is another theory that does seem comparable with both science and theology, and that is we are all living in a simulation. It clearly explains the existence of a complex being we can not see or have a conversation with..."I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end". The implication being God is everything and without God nothing exists. Even the Buddhists, who don't subscribe to a God, believe the beginning of this world and of life is inconceivable since they have neither beginning nor end, that the world was not created once upon a time, but that the world is constantly being created millions of times every second and that it will always continue to do so. The simulation theory suggests that each simulation is a product of a previous simulation. It also suggests that what we see is only what we need to see, in that moment.
if god exist then how come he allowed bronies to exist??
athiest:1
religion:0
I guess whoever guesses the right God wins right. Nothing but faith smh
Thank you for your attempt to educate
@ hiith
If God opened up the sky said "Hi" and then closed it up again would you believe what you saw and believe in the existence of God from that point on or would you consider what you saw to be an hallucination?
The reason I believe that God doesn't do more to prove his existence is because such a thing wouldn't convince people of his existence in the first place because we can choose to dismiss such things to be something else rather than what it really is.
However, what God does do is verify the faith that we have.
When one believes (trusts) the gospel (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) God verifies that faith through the receiving of his Holy Spirit.
God verifies our faith...he doesn't leave us in darkness to worry about whether or not we are saved after we have believed (trusted) the gospel (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) he confirms such a thing so that we KNOW that we are saved and will never have any doubts about it.
That's the sign of being a true born again Christian...you don't have any doubts that you are saved once you are saved.
The article isn't supposed to convince you. It basically says apologists are idiots. Any reasonable idea of God is beyond proof. Any projection of motives or other anthropomorphisation of God will fail eventually.
Good points as always, handsome Hiith.
8:22 Christian babies taste the sweetest.
Those Star Wars books tho!!
Wow. Just . . . wow. (2019-07)
“No indication that he exists” which probably means that you’re not looking hard enough. Religious stories don’t make the cut for news. If we Wanted to know He exists then he will show us in His own way. It’s kinda like unicorns, in a way. Do you believe in unicorns? I mean, I personally don’t but I’ve never gone to look for them. They are very magical so I don’t believe they exist. So. If you don’t believe in God, have you ever gone on a search for Him? The best way to prove facts to someone is to learn Everything there is about what they believe. So you know answers. Personally I believe that you need to have a relationship with God, and then he will reveal his power in your life. Because when you push Him away and don’t let him in, he won’t just force you to believe. It’s a test of faith. Sorry for my rant. If you’ve read this far, thank you for valuing my opinion.