Does God exist?

[Fnaar]

If you look at the account of creation in Genesis, and up to and beyond the flood, you'll see how different things were. Before the fall, nothing died! Creatures were designed to 'run' indefinitely. Even after the flood life spans were huge compared to today drawing shorter as the years went by. The floor changed the world in a negative way. Pre-flood, plants were bigger, animals were bigger and if the resurrection body of Christ is anything to go by Humans looked very different too. There was more oxygen in the atmosphere and it didn't rain!

Thanks Mr Pig! That's the funniest spoof I've read in ages!
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

 

[Fnaar]

The reason that I am a Christian is that I haven't the guts to bet that The Bible is wrong!

That's about the most sensible thing you've written.... well, some of us are brave enough to face the reality that we are simply quite highly evolved beings with a sense of our own consciousness, and that various members of our species can't really handle the pointlessness, the beauty, the potential and the reality of this! Fair enough, if a person is a believer, I won't hold it against him/her (it helped my dad quite a lot when he was terminally ill, probvides comfort to many etc etc), but I certainly won't take it seriopusly, and I will argue against its influence in schools, politics etc etc.

 

[andyoxon]

And there in a nutsell, is exactly why this whole thing is nonsense.

FM, IYO – fair enough.

'The people of God' being one nation etc. etc. Do any of you not see how this is simply a way justifying certain kinds of politics? And what about all the other 'chosen people'? I guess they just backed the 'wrong god'... and did the Judaeo-Christian god not like the Africans or something? It is not as if the Jews were in fact the first people in the world...

You might want to expand on your views on ‘political justifications’. Jesus (ben Joseph), was born 2000+ yrs ago, a Jew – and no not a Celt, or Asian, into a turbulent time in middle Eastern history. The OT relates God’s dealing with the people leading up to this planned and pivotal event; the New Testament, the Gospel message for Jew and gentile – the world... The book of Acts describes Christianity’s spreading throughout the region and beyond in the early years; this church continues to grow in places that you mention e.g. Africa (also see: Philip and the Eithiopian official – Acts).

 

[Flying_Monkey]

You might want to expand on your views on ‘political justifications’. Jesus (ben Joseph), was born 2000+ yrs ago, a Jew – and no not a Celt, or Asian, into a turbulent time in middle Eastern history. The OT relates God’s dealing with the people leading up to this planned and pivotal event; the New Testament, the Gospel message for Jew and gentile – the world... The book of Acts describes Christianity’s spreading throughout the region and beyond in the early years; this church continues to grow in places that you mention e.g. Africa (also see: Philip and the Eithiopian official – Acts).

I know what the official line is. And I have read all the books of the Bible, most of them several times (and many that aren't in it as well).

But - so what? How does that answer my questions?

 

[Fnaar]

... the Roman-Jewish war of 66-70CE was fought by two generals, Vespasian and his son Titus. They used their military success in the Middle East to rally popular support in Rome

Aha... inventors of the scooter!

 

[andyoxon]

I know what the official line is. And I have read all the books of the Bible, most of them several times (and many that aren't in it as well).
But - so what? How does that answer my questions?

Do any of you not see how this is simply a way justifying certain kinds of politics?

I thought this was rhetorical to some extent... but as I said perhaps you can elaborate on "justifying certain kinds of politics".

And what about all the other 'chosen people'? ... I guess they just backed the 'wrong god'... and did the Judaeo-Christian god not like the Africans or something?

FM, "other 'chosen people'"? Jesus, in a sense, had to be born into a particular nation at a particular time in history, Israel was it – in around 6BC Palestine, and not Ethiopia - for example, at some other point in time. It does not follow therefore that because Jesus was not African, that this continent or other nations are 'not liked' - the Gospel message is for the world, and it started spreading through ordinary, and persecuted, people in the early church to the present day. Life, our snapshot of history, continues and peoples around the globe, were and still are, adherents to different religions and philosophies.

 

[andyoxon]

Andy, I can't remeber who penned it all, indeed the odd bit I've added myself. It's from an archive I keep for such debates :-)

Of course 'Jesus' used and taught from the OT... the Roman-Jewish war of 66-70CE was fought by two generals, Vespasian and his son Titus. They used their military success in the Middle East to rally popular support in Rome and stage a military coup and take over the throne. Vespasian became the first of the new dynasty of Flavian emperors, and was succeeded by his eldest son Titus, and then by his youngest son Domitian. The problem the Flavian emperors had was to legitimate their rule by creating useful myths and propaganda. In particular they had to offer an alternative to the stories of the Jews in order to try and trick them into worshipping a false literary messiah, who would really be Caesar in disguise.

The Romans wanted people to believe there was a historical Jesus. That was their whole way of tricking and deceiving the Jews into accepting their imitation pro-Roman version of the Torah.

Proof that some conspiracy theories really do jump through hoops? I hadn't heard that one.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

I have to say that there is as little evidence for Jim's version as for Andy's - I however that does not increase the credibility of Andy's!

Basically you have got a very confused situation 2000 years ago with multiple cults and political agendas. One of these, for very contingent reasons, ends up being very powerful and becoming the dominant religion in Europe (and for a time, the world). But whatever retrospective pseudo-historical or mystical justifications people come up with, there is no more 'truth' to this story of a messiah than any of the others that had floated around for years before this and continued (and continue) to appear afterwards.

The same thing could happen to any cult or bizarre set of beliefs -Scientology, for example - in fact you can observe similar processes in motion. The construction of a core mythos, the spread across nations, the acquisition of powerful allies and media influence etc etc etc. Of course the only difference is that we know for certain that Scientology was entirely made up because we have observed it happening and it is well documented. Unfortunately, the evidence for Jesus, and in particular for the Jesus demanded by Christians, is very slim.

 

[dudi]

so... errr... anyone for a liberal mindset? anyone?

got a little bag of live & let live here...

anyone fancy a handful of each to their own?

got a nice "horses for corses" ice-cream, anyone?

how about a balm to cure that nasty case of "i've got to be right and you've got to be wrong".

anyone?
no, i didn't think so...

 

[dudi]

p.s.
please read the above comment in the voice of Stewie from Family Guy.

 

[Noodley]

p.s.
please read the above comment in the voice of Stewie from Family Guy.

It makes much more sense that way...

 

[Mr Pig]

Of course the only difference is that we know for certain that Scientology was entirely made up because we have observed it happening and it is well documented. Unfortunately, the evidence for Jesus, and in particular for the Jesus demanded by Christians, is very slim.

I don't know where you are getting these ideas from. The evidence for The Bible's historical accuracy is in fact very, very strong. Pretty rock solid to be honest.

I agree that many religions or cults are fantasised. For instance the Book Of Mormon and other Mormon writings describe many cities and places for which there is no evidence whatsoever and the only people who accept accept their existence are the Mormons! Although they (Joseph Smith) also said that there were people living on the moon who dressed like Quakers! I guess that back then he figured he'd get away with that one ;0)

The Jehovah's Witnesses predicted that Christ would return and set up his kingdom in 1914, and on several other dates after that, when presumably his flight was delayed! Ask a Jehovah's Witness about that today though and they'll deny all knowledge of it, and they may be telling the truth as they are forbidden to read old Witness literature. Can't think why...

What some of you might be forgetting is that 'I' once tried to rip the bible apart! I was a very happy atheist, evolutionist and just as antagonistic toward the idea that the Bible might be true as some of you are. All I can do is encourage you to be a bit more open minded.

If you're prepared to try looking at things from the other side of the fence then sites like this are very interesting:

http://christiananswers.net/

What I found when I examined the Bible from the perspective that it might be true was that the evidence for that being the case was far stronger than the argument against. However all of this debate is missing the most important element of all, the supernatural one! If God is real and wants you to know Him then surely he can actively intervene in your life? The answer is yes. If you want to know the truth, not just 'a' truth that suites your own desires, then ask Him to show it to you.

When I first did this I wasn't even convinced that God existed. I merley asked that if He was there He would show me. The Bible says that God will not turn his face away from those who seek him. It's not about who you are, what you can do or think. It's about what He can do and whether you are prepared to let Him work in your life.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

Thanks, Mr Pig - as a trained historian and social scientist, I get my ideas from looking at all the evidence.

And I used to be a Christian. So the idea that you have a better (or more balanced) view than me having gone from being a non-Christian to a Christian is simply wrong.

In terms of historical accuracy, there is no single view on 'The Bible' and you certainly can't make statements like you did with any validity. The Bible is not one organic entity anyway, it is a collection of myths, genealogies, histories, poems, stories and so on, which has been altered in both oral and written transmission and subject to processes of selection, some of which are well documented (and indeed very political). Parts have more or less independent historical confirmation than others. But it would be difficult to describe any as historically accurate.

BTW, Christiananswers.com is utterly ignorant fundamentalist creationist nonsense. I can't be much more polite about it. Their film reviews are very funny though...

 

[bonj2]

oh and i don't buy this practice of putting "Him" with a capital "H" either.
Who does god think he is, that he needs a capital letter when using the objective pronoun for god's sake? Is he going to get pissed off just 'cos you don't give him one?

 

[Mr Pig]

oh and i don't buy this practise of putting "Him" with a capital "H" either

It's up to you what you do, it's not my business. Why should it bother you what I do?

I think this thread has pretty much ran its course. It was always likely to be an emotive subject and I'm pleased the moderators have let it run so long. I think it's likely to start going around in circles now though and I don't want to be part of a tit for tat slagging match.

Although I've been called deluded, ignorant of science and asked if I've had a bump on the head I notice that there has been little real substance to the arguments against some of the simple points I've made. How do you explain the fact that the concept of macro-evolution breaks two fundamental laws of science? Why is it considered science when it cannot be observed, tested or replicated? Why is it considered reasonable to conclude that the most complex designs known to man, life forms, came about by chance when we would not accept this as the explanation for any other object that exhibited lesser features of design?

When I look at my body, the amazing integrated systems and structures that work together to let me move around and be a part of this world, I see design. I see that something, somewhere, vastly more intelligent than I am thought this up, planed this out and made this incredible machine we walk around in work. I may not be able to take in the idea of a living being that is beyond the constraints of time, space and our known universe but I believe He exists. I also believe that before Him my knowledge and wisdom is as nothing and I am completely at His mercy.

We are all free to choose as we wish and I do not look down on anyone who rejects God, it's your decision to make. Having said my piece I'm going to leave this thread and let its readers form their own opinions, as their mind, spirit and creator may...or may not lead them ;0)