23 Jun 09
2 edits
What shall separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus?
Black Holes ?
NO!
What about asteriods plunging into the earth ?
No.
What about Evolution in the future, or the dying out of the sun, or the colliding of galaxies, or the rise of robots in rebellion, or World War III.
Nothing shall separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Now ...... why does God exist ? Don't know. We're loved with an eternal and everlasting Love. Is it important why He exists?
- Joined
- 30 May 09
- Moves
- 30120
23 Jun 09
Originally posted by jaywillSorry, I don't believe you.
What shall separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus?
Black Holes ?
NO!
What about asteriods plunging into the earth ?
No.
What about Evolution in the future, or the dying out of the sun, or the colliding of galaxies, or the rise of robots in rebellion, or World War III.
Nothing shall separate us from the love of God in Christ ...[text shortened]... know. We're [b]loved with an eternal and everlasting Love. Is it important why He exists?[/b]
24 Jun 09
Originally posted by jaywillIt's called Dopamine. Your brain releases it to comfort you.
These are deep questions. Why does God exist is a question I can't hope to answer.
However, in my experience an unspeakable peace about existence as a whole comes over my whole being when I consider the love of God. Somehow knowing the great love of God in Christ Jesus makes the whole universe more sensible and peaceful to my being:
24 Jun 09
3 edits
Originally posted by Lord Shark[/i]Your argument pre-supposes that mountains exist. We can all agree that mountains exist. We have real proof. From there it is fair to ask Why mountains exist.
"We know that mountains exist. We can see and touch them. We can neither see nor touch God. Belief is not evidence."
Nor did I say that it was. I just pointed out that knowing that something exists can be logically separate from knowing why something exists. I did this to demonstrate that your 'underlying point':"If you cannot explain WHY Go ...[text shortened]... is invalid.
If you can't see why this is so, I'd be happy to explain further.
But,
We cannot pre-suppose that god exists. We have no real proof. Therefore, we cannot use mountains and god in equal measures.
You need to use another example to back your argument. Your example must include something that we do not know exists.
24 Jun 09
Originally posted by Lord SharkI didn't spend 4 years in Uni doing undergrad work in Relgious Studies for nothing.
"So, god must exist in order for the theists theory to work....?
classic"
This is the Argument From Contingency, I'm sure you have heard of it as you have correctly identified it as a classic.
Just in case you are unclear on the distinction between this and the kalam argument, this is a useful link:
http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/theistic-proofs/the-cosmological-argument/the-argument-from-contingency/
I understand the arguments. It does us no good to recount old arguments. Do you have anything new?
Why does God exist?
24 Jun 09
Originally posted by daniel58The question "Why does God exist?" is without meaning if there is no answer to the question "Does God exist?".
The question is not "Does God exist?" it's "Why does God exist"
Or it has the same meaning to ask "Why does the Tooth Ferrie exist?".
- Joined
- 30 May 09
- Moves
- 30120
24 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by uzlessMy example illustrates that we can know that something exists without knowing why it exists. This is enough to render your conclusion invalid.
[/i]Your argument pre-supposes that mountains exist. We can all agree that mountains exist. We have real proof. From there it is fair to ask Why mountains exist.
But,
We cannot pre-suppose that god exists. We have no real proof. Therefore, we cannot use mountains and god in equal measures.
You need to use another example to back your argument. Your example must include something that we do not know exists.
The example presupposes that we share a belief that mountains exist. It depends on this for its explanatory value. However you are wrong if you seek to imply a structural flaw, since it is true that I could know that boojums exist even if I didn't know why they existed.
- Joined
- 30 May 09
- Moves
- 30120
24 Jun 09
Originally posted by uzlessSo if you understand these arguments why did you respond with your 'classic' comment? If you understood that to ask why a necessary being exists is problematic, why didn't you respond in such a way as to disclose that knowledge?
I didn't spend 4 years in Uni doing undergrad work in Relgious Studies for nothing.
I understand the arguments. It does us no good to recount old arguments. Do you have anything new?
Why does God exist?
Do I have anything new????? Are you mad? Really really clever people have been at this for ages, and I suppose we could do a new ideas competition between us, but it wouldn't amount to a hill of beans would it?
As to the question "Why does god exist?", I have no answer, I don't believe in god, but if I did I would probably construe god as a necessary being anyway, and thus suppose your question meaningless.
25 Jun 09
Originally posted by Lord SharkPeople said the same thing to Einstein, the same thing to Newton, to Kant, to Les Paul, to Freud. Yet, they all came up with new ideas. We should never accept that we have examined every issue from every side and that new insights are not to be gained by a re-examination.
Do I have anything new????? Are you mad? Really really clever people have been at this for ages, .
If not you, then who?
25 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by daniel58If I ask you why the tooth fairy doesn't exist, your exact answer can be applied to the question why god doesn't exist as well. Both are mythical beings.
The tooth fairy doesn't exist, but if you want to ask "Does God exist" start a new thread.
I don't have to start a new thread. I answered another posting, a very relevant question of this thread, by the way.