Originally posted by VillagerWell, if the universe did have a beginning, then at some point there was nothing. It would seem to me that this nothing would require an input of energy to create something. A static system of nothing couldn't become a changing system of matter without some kind of energy input. This energy couldn't come from inside the universe, so something not of this universe must have caused this universe to begin. This something is what might be called God.
This throws up an interesting question, for those of you who don't believe in God: suppose that He does exist; what 'proof' would you accept for this, that couldn't be otherwise ascribed to natural causes, delusional psychology or something else?
No doubt you will all find major holes in this logic.
I would just like to say something about proving the God idea. What good does it do us? What good does it do God for us to prove his existence? Take the children of Israel for example. They saw the miracles that Moses performed and the parting of the Red Sea and such. They saw the pillar of smoke to lead them by day and the pillar of fire to lead them by night. They saw the manna come down from heaven to feed them. They had to know that God existed. However, they still did not place their faith in him. Instead they asked Moses why he had lead them out into the desert to die and ended up worshiping a golden calf. Therefore, what good does it do God to prove himself? It has not aided people in the past to place their faith in him. It stands to reason that it will not now as well. I do not buy the concept that seeing is believing. Christ did miracles and raised people from the dead, yet many people did not place their faith in him either. People placing their faith in God is what God is interested in. Proving God is what those of faith are often preoccupied with. Conversly, proving that God does not exist is often what nonbelievers are occupied with. Neither the beleiver or nonbeleiver is interested in what the other has to say in this regard.
Originally posted by Codfish"At some point" in what dimension? Without the universe, there is no space or time. Where would this energy come from? What does it mean to be "not of this universe"? Where is God?
Well, if the universe did have a beginning, then at some point there was nothing. It would seem to me that this nothing would require an input of energy to create something. A static system of nothing couldn't become a changing system of matter without some kind of energy input. This energy couldn't come from inside the universe, so something not of this uni ...[text shortened]... omething is what might be called God.
No doubt you will all find major holes in this logic.
Originally posted by whodeyYou're assuming all these miraculous events happened and that God made them happen. These are not reasonable assumptions to make.
I would just like to say something about proving the God idea. What good does it do us? What good does it do God for us to prove his existence? Take the children of Israel for example. They saw the miracles that Moses performed and the parting of the Red Sea and such. They saw the pillar of smoke to lead them by day and the pillar of fire to lead them by ...[text shortened]... Neither the beleiver or nonbeleiver is interested in what the other has to say in this regard.
Originally posted by VillagerAgain this would depend on the definition of "God" being used. If we assume the Christian God (scripture-based) the task would be quite simple.
This throws up an interesting question, for those of you who don't believe in God: suppose that He does exist; what 'proof' would you accept for this, that couldn't be otherwise ascribed to natural causes, delusional psychology or something else?
Given the omnipotent nature of God, I would accept repeated and verified miracles. That is to say events thoroughly unexplainable through any known process, observed by as many qualified individuals as possible, and produced on demand as well as by demand.
The 'Rapture' would also be sufficient, assuming events transpired exactly to Biblical specifications.
-JC
Originally posted by knightmeisterRomans 1:20
Let's face it guys , if there was some way that someone could construct an argument that could 'prove' (or disprove)God then it would have been done by now. Do we really think (Xstians or atheists) that someone on this forum or somehwere in the world is going to suddenly stumble across a 'proof' and we are all going to go.....ahhhh! of course! Why didn sible. Without it God is just a preposterous mathematical nonsensical concept.
For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without EXCUSE.
Originally posted by VillagerSome series of contraventions of the natural order, matching the content of requests of mine, that could be independently verified by well-equipped scientists.
This throws up an interesting question, for those of you who don't believe in God: suppose that He does exist; what 'proof' would you accept for this, that couldn't be otherwise ascribed to natural causes, delusional psychology or something else?
EDIT: Or, what Churlant said above.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungI get the feelling that if you were there to witness the Red Sea parting you would say that it was due to an earth quake. If you saw Christ raise someone from the dead you would say he was never dead to begin with. You can explain anything away that you do not believe. You could even say the holacaust never happened and convince yourself of this. This is why belief is so important. Belief is the construct on how process data and what conclusions you come to when assessing that data.
You're assuming all these miraculous events happened and that God made them happen. These are not reasonable assumptions to make.