Does God exist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The basis of ANY religious belief is essentially a description of things that no one can prove, whose ultimate truth is " because I say it’s the truth"

🙂

ANY religious statement that you can make I can reduce to it’s ultimate creator, man himself.

Care to give me a go!?🙂
Sure.

God is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Are you going to give me one too, as explaining yours is going to more interesting as I don’t argue that my religious statements aren’t based on authority?
 
Says who? That’s not what Hindu’s believe.
God says so. Look it up. 🙂

Why should I care what hindus believe?

I thought you were going to do this:

ANY religious statement that you can make I can reduce to it’s ultimate creator, man himself.

Saying “Who says so?”, doesn’t accomplish what you said you’d accomplish above.

Would you like to try again?
 
In middle school, I believe it was, I was introduced to Evolution, per the Neo-Darwinist school of thought:

Simple animals developed at random into more complex animals through mutations that were beneficial. The better the mutation, the better a new animal could survive in varied climates. The mutations would be random, and those animals without mutations or with harmful ones would eventually die off, being replaced by better animals.

Wonderful! Perfection! What a beautiful system! Simple creatures would become bigger, better, more interesting creatures when something triggered their genes to mutate, creating a wonderous variety! One small shift in genes would get us lions, housecats, bobcats, and pumas. A slight change would create a rainbow of colorful birds to fill the skies. How many different types of beetles are there, and how many types of butterflies? Variety! Hallelujah!

To my mind, this was the most eloquent engin that God designed on the Earth. Weather patterns can be unstable, sometimes causing hurricanes (Thank you, Ike, I was without power for 10 days!). Photosynthesis seems lacking in the grab-you beauty, though it’s perfectly functional. The molton core of the Earth flowing out as lava periodically does grab the imagination, and can bring to mind the power and beauty of God’s creation, but the same forces cause earthquakes, and those can be disruptive.

Now, naturally, all those negatives that we humans find in the natural engins of the Earth are probably caused by the Curse. After all, God declared everything “good” at the beginning, so most likely hurricanes weren’t a factor before the whole apple incident.

But evolution? We humans haven’t been able to find a way to mess that up, or to brush it away and ignore it. Even those who believe in the literal six-day Creation know that animals evolve, because we have so many different types of dogs and cats, because ancient humans specially bred corn plants until the male and female parts switched genders on them, because we were able to selectively change the animals we live and work with.

It’s the perfect engin. Of course, that whole “random chance” thing doesn’t wash with me, because every animal fits too perfectly into its environment. Something has to program animal DNA to change properly as the world around the animals changes.

I was always a believer, but Natural Selection was the best evidence I had in nature that God’s hand is always at work in the world, even today.

Just my personal opinion, but eh.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CatsAndDogs View Post

Why should I care what hindus believe?

Maybe because their faith may be the only truth.
Only you have made that claim. THEY don’t even make that claim! 🙂

So, why should I believe YOU?

At any rate, since I happen to KNOW that they are not the “only truth” (whatever that means), perhaps you can explain to me why I’m wrong and you’re not?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CatsAndDogs View Post
God says so. Look it up.

Your wrong. Zeus never said that he was the father, the son and the holy spirit.
So, you equate “God” with “Zeus”?

OK. So, on what authority do you make that claim?
 
So, you equate “God” with “Zeus”?

OK. So, on what authority do you make that claim?
Zeus is a God. You said " God says so."

Zeus never said that. Therefor, your statement is incorrect.

You should have said, " My God says so".

Zeus was created by man. Have you ever thought that perhaps the Christian God was also a creation of man?

Have you ever noticed the striking similarities between Jesus and the Egyptian God of Osiris?

Have you ever noticed the mirade of virgin births in ancient mytholigical stories dealing with various Gods?

Why should you believe me? You don’t have to.
 
Zeus is a God. You said " God says so."

Zeus never said that. Therefor, your statement is incorrect.
🙂
You should have said, " My God says so".
My God is your God, and every person’s one and only God, and Zeus is not God, but a god, so saying “My God” is redundant, and somehow saying that Zeus said what he couldn’t say is simply silly and self-contradictory.
Zeus was created by man. Have you ever thought that perhaps the Christian God was also a creation of man?
When I didn’t know what “God” meant, it seemed that God was just another man-created god, but since understanding what “God” means it makes no sense to think of God as a man-created god.
Have you ever noticed the striking similarities between Jesus and the Egyptian God of Osiris?
Yes. And Osiris is a “demonic shadow (mask)” of Jesus, which was occasionally hijacked by angels now and then for good purposes, which for the most part was used by the demonic powers to lead men away from true religion (revelation via the People of God and/or listening to natural law).
Have you ever noticed the mirade of virgin births in ancient mytholigical stories dealing with various Gods?
Same as above.
Why should you believe me? You don’t have to.
You seem to think I should believe you. Why do you think that? Would it be for my own good to believe you?

I say what I do in response to what you say because knowing the truth, as opposed to floundering around in your ignorance, is good for you.

Your incorrect use of terms, your incorrect basic premises (axioms), and your very faulty logic (even with your own terms) needs to be corrected.

Now, why should I believe you when you are so obviously wrong?
 
seeker

Zeus was created by man. Have you ever thought that perhaps the Christian God was also a creation of man?

No, Jesus Christ actually lived. People knew him and recorded their thoughts about him. The Gospel accounts reflect a real man, and given the sincerity and moral genius of the gospels, it is doubtful the evangelists were a conspiring pack of liars.

Zeus, although probably a god worshiped by some ancient tribe, is very much the creation of a poet named Homer. No one has been able to document Zeus’ actual appearance on earth, as we have been able to document the appearance of Jesus.
 
seeker

Zeus was created by man. Have you ever thought that perhaps the Christian God was also a creation of man?

No, Jesus Christ actually lived. People knew him and recorded their thoughts about him. The Gospel accounts reflect a real man, and given the sincerity and moral genius of the gospels, it is doubtful the evangelists were a conspiring pack of liars.

Zeus, although probably a god worshiped by some ancient tribe, is very much the creation of a poet named Homer. No one has been able to document Zeus’ actual appearance on earth, as we have been able to document the appearance of Jesus.
So, by your logic, the existence of Jesus proves that he is God.

No evidence exists that Zeus was real, therefor he must not be a real God.

I’ll remind you that there is no “physical” evidence that the trinity exists, nor of transubstantiation. Yet, undoubtedly, you firmly believe in those doctrines.

Your logic is faulty.
 
Yes. And Osiris is a “demonic shadow (mask)” of Jesus…
Question - How do we know that?

Answer - The early Church

Why did the early Church feel the need to discuss “Gods” like Osiris that existed 2500 BC or provide any explanation as to their apparent similarities to Christ?

If Jesus is the son of God, then why the need to even provide any rationalization for the similarities between Jesus and Osiris.

Is it not disturbing that a God, Osiris, was worshiped 2500 years before the birth of Christ. That the story of Osiris shares so many similarities with the Jesus story, that the early Church’s solution to refuting any of the similarities is to say " it’s the work of the Devil."?

Doesn’t that blow you away? Doesn’t that at least create an inkling of skepticism or doubt within you?

Is that the only plausible explanation regarding the similarities?
 
So, by your logic, the existence of Jesus proves that he is God.
No. God proves He is God. Recorded history proves only that He was an actual person.
No evidence exists that Zeus was real, therefor he must not be a real God.
No. God proves that Zeus is not God (or a “real god” either). Recorded history proves that Zeus is a myth.
I’ll remind you that there is no “physical” evidence that the trinity exists, nor of transubstantiation. Yet, undoubtedly, you firmly believe in those doctrines.
“Physical” evidence is not necessary to prove that the Holy Trinity is God and exists. God alone can prove that, which He does.

You need what you can’t get to prove what you don’t want. That is a lovely “set up” for making it impossible to have a real understanding of anything related to God.
Your logic is faulty.
Where? (either Charlemagne II’s, or mine) I’d love to know how and where we’re wrong. Thanks for that very valuable information. 🙂
 
The problem is that I could fill in every line that you wrote with some made up God that I just created and claim the same ’ proofs’ that your throwing my way.

You deny the reality of other peoples Gods and insist that yours is real.

We are at an impasse.
 
The problem with Panentheism, is that the belief is that God is in everythig and outside of everything…God is basically everything.

I’m not being crass, but if that is the case, then Panentheism asserts that God must also be the nasty bits that we leave behind in lavatories.

Panentheism sounds great when you think about the beautiful things in the world, but it looses credibility when you think about the nasty things in this world.

I considered Panentheism, but rejected it once I got as far as that.

See Dante, Paradiso 33. His vision is of all creation as “contained” “in” God; which is what I meant. That “all things” are “in Christ” is the teaching & insight of St. Paul. 🙂

To say that all created reality is “in God” has nothing to do with identifying created things with God; rather the reverse, if anything. God is not “part of” creation, but inconceivably “other than” it. It has no “real relation” to God, unless He relates it to Himself. (Aquinas has plenty to say on “real relations”, & on purely conceptual ones.) This “Otherness” of God is a metaphysical “registration” of His moral Holiness.

As for the bad stuff - “good” is convertible with “being”; moral evil is a parasite on being. Vomit (for example) is “bad” nor morally, but relatively - it is “ex-food”, not food; it is not bad, but merely inconvenient. In the right place, it is not a problem - the same goes for that other stuff. It is healthy to empty the bowels, not unhealthy - to be forved to eat it OTOH is not healthy, because it is not food, but another form of “ex-food”.

But neither form of “what was food” is bad in itself. Any more than an avalanche is bad in itself; much of what we call bad is bad only in combination with something else - such as a human population. Avalanche - fine; avalanche at the sight of an Alpine village - tragedy. The avalanche is the same either way - the difference in value judgements is a consequence of our relation to it. If a sharp-shooter kills a terrorist he may get a medal; if he uses the same skills to kill a policeman in a robbery, he is likely to be executed. The skill is the same - the context of its use, is not. So “badness” is often a matter of context - the execution dreaded by a criminal is the same event as that imposed by a judge: but their attitudes to it are likely to be different.

BTW: the Wikipedia article on Panentheism says nothing of the Christian form of it, which is a great pity 😦 Christian Panentheism is not at all the Stoic doctrine of pantheism, or any other; the Stoic type of pantheism does not distinguish between God & the world - but this distinction is fundamental to any doctrine of God that aspires to be Christian.
 
seeker

If Jesus is the son of God, then why the need to even provide any rationalization for the similarities between Jesus and Osiris.

The reason for doing so, I suppose, is that historians of religion (most of them seem to be atheists, ironically) have sometimes tried to diminish the importance of Jesus by comparing his mission with the mission of Osiris, Mithra, and even some of the Indian gods, as Hitler insisted. Certain scholars like to imply that Jesus was a late-comer and really not the least bit of an original. This is a shallow view and easily disproven by the fact that Old Testament prophecies, if you follow them closely enough, starting with Gensis, consistently prepare us for the coming of Jesus as the Mesiah. There is no comparable historical record fulfilled for **any **of the pagan gods.

Would you please explain 5 points of likeness between Osiris and Jesus? When you have finished doing that, I will show you five points of likeness between Socrates and Jesus. Does that mean that Jesus was a composite likeness of Osiris and Socrates? You could also have fun making such wild comparisons, but in the end that would get you nowhere because the Messiah ultimately is an original, and no other god on earth has been made by men to be anything but a pale likeness of the one and only Jesus Christ. Osiris and Mithras died and were buried for good. Jesus is the only one that died and still rises every morning in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
 
The Big Bang, which now is more scientific fact than theory, allows for a start to the universe, but science cannot fathom how the universe started.

AFAICS, science could do so only if the universe had started. IOW, it would have had to have started before it started - which is a contradiction. Not only so, but the start that had started before the start :hypno: would itself require to be accounted for - & so on ad infinitum. Which is why science cannot “go back” to the very beginning; of its very nature, it can have access only to a reality already existing - not to the metaphysical principle of that reality’s existence.​

So the universe is a “given”, an entity that is not altogether self-explanatory - which means it is not ultimate, but is from something not itself.
It is therefore a fact (containing an element of faith) that must be a huge embarassment to atheists who maintain that the universe is eternal and without a moment in which it was created.
 

See Dante, Paradiso 33. His vision is of all creation as “contained” “in” God; which is what I meant. That “all things” are “in Christ” is the teaching & insight of St. Paul. 🙂

To say that all created reality is “in God” has nothing to do with identifying created things with God;…
Excellent post, you have given me a lot to think about.
 
Would you please explain 5 points of likeness between Osiris and Jesus?.
If you follow the following link, you can see 42 similarities between Horus and Christ. Horus is the son of Osiris.

atheistsaiyanmonkey.blogspot.com/2007/07/similarities-between-jesus-and-horus.html

Here’s the first 12
  1. Both were conceived of a virgin.
  2. Both were the “only begotten son” of a god (either Osiris or Yahweh)
  3. Horus’s mother was Meri, Jesus’s mother was Mary.
  4. Horus’s foster father was called Jo-Seph, and Jesus’s foster father was Joseph.
  5. Both foster fathers were of royal descent.
  6. Both were born in a cave (although sometimes Jesus is said to have been born in a stable).
  7. Both had their coming announced to their mother by an angel.
  8. Horus; birth was heralded by the star Sirius (the morning star). Jesus had his birth heralded by a star in the East (the sun rises in the East).
  9. Ancient Egyptians celebrated the birth of Horus on December 21 (the Winter Solstice). Modern Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus on December 25.
  10. Both births were announced by angels (this si nto the same as number 7).
  11. Both had shepherds witnessing the birth.
  12. Horus was visited at birth by “three solar deities” and Jesus was visited by “three wise men”.
Another link …

adam.com.au/bstett/BJesusandHorus74.htm

Osiris similarities…
Code:
  Both were killed by supermortal enemies. For the Egyptians it was Seth; for Christians it was the Devil
*

  Jesus was crucified at the full moon, Passover. Osiris was dismembered at the full moon.
*

  Jesus was in his 30's when he was killed; Osiris was 28.
*

  Both suffered bodily harm: Jesus was crucified; Osiris was dismembered.
*

  Both rose from the dead.
*

  Both returned to their home in heaven.
*

  Jesus is recognized by Christians as God and Creator; Osiris was recognized by the ancient   Egyptians as Creator and Ruler of the Heavens.
*

  Both had the power to raise human mortals from the dead.
*

  The ancient Egyptians appealed to Osiris for eternal life. Christians appeal to Jesus for eternal life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top