Direct or Indirect

If god is so powerful, why can't we verify his existence directly. Everyone who believes in god today is taking other peoples' word(s) for it. Given that people often are in error reporting on current events, why should we believe people from 2000 or more years ago especially when it is likely many were acting in there own self interest.

Originally posted by 667joe
If god is so powerful, why can't we verify his existence directly. Everyone who believes in god today is taking other peoples' word(s) for it. Given that people often are in error reporting on current events, why should we believe people from 2000 or more years ago especially when it is likely many were acting in there own self interest.

Because christians have the wrong conception of God. God is the ground of all being,(feminine principal), rather than some Guy sitting in the clouds with a long white beard.

Originally posted by 667joe
If god is so powerful, why can't we verify his existence directly. Everyone who believes in god today is taking other peoples' word(s) for it. Given that people often are in error reporting on current events, why should we believe people from 2000 or more years ago especially when it is likely many were acting in there own self interest.

What would that do, say for you as an example, in what you would do or wouldn't do knowing he was real?

Originally posted by galveston75
What would that do, say for you as an example, in what you would do or wouldn't do knowing he was real?

For the purposes of this thread, I am not saying if god is real or not. I am trying to find out why people are sure god exists when they have only learned of god indirectly from other (fallible) humans. Perhaps some RHP member has learned about god directly. I would certainly like to hear the details.

Originally posted by 667joe
For the purposes of this thread, I am not saying if god is real or not. I am trying to find out why people are sure god exists when they have only learned of god indirectly from other (fallible) humans. Perhaps some RHP member has learned about god directly. I would certainly like to hear the details.

But in your opinion, if there is a God and he can see that so many don't believe he exist, why doesn't he show hinself?

Originally posted by galveston75
But in your opinion, if there is a God and he can see that so many don't believe he exist, why doesn't he show hinself?

Maybe he is naked!

Originally posted by 667joe
Maybe he is naked!

Ok..funny, but are you wanting a serious discussion?

Originally posted by 667joe
If god is so powerful, why can't we verify his existence directly. Everyone who believes in god today is taking other peoples' word(s) for it. Given that people often are in error reporting on current events, why should we believe people from 2000 or more years ago especially when it is likely many were acting in there own self interest.

I'm not wanting to be the anti-667joe poster here, or an apologist for religions or christianity. As most people will know I'm a pretty strident atheist.
But Joe, I think you're missing a pretty fundamental aspect of a religious person's faith - it's not all based on the words of others. Many religious people claim to have experienced things that they attribute to a god.
I would argue that these experiences are manifestations of internal mental events, but of course, that would be how an atheist describes them. For many people, these experiences are real and tangible and form the basis of their faith.

'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me,' said Jesus.

Originally posted by 667joe
If god is so powerful, why can't we verify his existence directly. Everyone who believes in god today is taking other peoples' word(s) for it. Given that people often are in error reporting on current events, why should we believe people from 2000 or more years ago especially when it is likely many were acting in there own self interest.

If god is so powerful, why can't we verify his existence directly
would you like to rephrase that? or add somethig more? because i cannot see a logic between the two sentences. "if john is a lawyer why can't we get him to coach our footbal team?"

assuming you are implying that since god is so powerful he should be able to do all kinds of stuff and let us know he is real i want to ask you: you can kick puppies and kill kittens, why don't you?

Originally posted by 667joe
For the purposes of this thread, I am not saying if god is real or not. I am trying to find out why people are sure god exists when they have only learned of god indirectly from other (fallible) humans. Perhaps some RHP member has learned about god directly. I would certainly like to hear the details.

you assume that the only way someone can become religious is if someone else indoctrinates them. well like ammanion said, some religious people draw their faith from within, not outside.

my parents mentioned only briefly "hey, there is a god". they never got me to church more than a few (once or twice) times ever. most of my friends are atheists. and unlike amanion said, i never got any dreams or religious experiences to lead me to believe there is a god because really now, the infinite supreme being has something better to do than give me a proof of his existance when a girl is dying of cancer in a hospital somewhere and some dood is being burnt alive because he entered a burning building to save someone's child.

my faith comes internally. i believe that there is a god because really the universe would be made better if a benevolent being is out there. i probably would be able to live without my faith but really, why would i want to? god only requires me to do things that any decent persone would be required to do anyway. and it's nice to believe that you have someone to talk to even if that person doesn't talk back.

and other reasons. these should be sufficient to prove that sometimes a person draw their faith internally. that she gets some information and draws her own conclusion. that faith is beneficial when it is responsible.

Originally posted by 667joe
For the purposes of this thread, I am not saying if god is real or not. I am trying to find out why people are sure god exists when they have only learned of god indirectly from other (fallible) humans. Perhaps some RHP member has learned about god directly. I would certainly like to hear the details.

Historical text books is where it all begins.

The oldest ones apparently date back to around 3000 B.C. These books are proof that God does exist and are the oldest books for any type of religion. People then believed in God, all their names are listed in the Bible. These people have followed Gods request to go out to the world and preach (in a nutshell that is).

Why God does not reveal everything now, is His choice, and the only reason I can think of is that it will spoil all the fun. If you know what you are getting for your birthday, its no surprise any more is it?

Not all text books are accurate, but take a look where Christianity comes from. It was the first religion and still is going today. Why is that is the question we must ask. Isnt it because God really does exist? I mean, were we there 5000 years ago? How can we proof they are lying? No way we can .

Now think about this...If people start questioning historical text books of Christianity, ALL historical text books of every kind should also be in question don't you think? None of us can really ever proof these things and that is why you need to open your heart, head, eyes and soul to see that everything was created by a creator which obviously must be God.

Take evolution for example. Correct me if I'm wrong but the oldest text books on evolution goes back around 200/250 years ago. Why is it that we only have historical books ageing 3000 B.C and not earlier than that. By evolution we should have had text books ageing thousands and thousands of years. This earth should have been full of fossils everywhere if this was the case.

Originally posted by Nicksten
Historical text books is where it all begins.

The oldest ones apparently date back to around 3000 B.C. These books are proof that God does exist and are the oldest books for any type of religion. People then believed in God, all their names are listed in the Bible. These people have followed Gods request to go out to the world and preach (in a nutshell ousands of years. This earth should have been full of fossils everywhere if this was the case.

Are you suggesting the older the text is the more valid it is?

If you think Christianity was the first religion, then you really don't have a clue what your talking about.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Are you suggesting the older the text is the more valid it is?

If you think Christianity was the first religion, then you really don't have a clue what your talking about.

Well put!

Originally posted by Nicksten
Historical text books is where it all begins.

The oldest ones apparently date back to around 3000 B.C. These books are proof that God does exist and are the oldest books for any type of religion. People then believed in God, all their names are listed in the Bible. These people have followed Gods request to go out to the world and preach (in a nutshell ...[text shortened]... ousands of years. This earth should have been full of fossils everywhere if this was the case.

Take evolution for example. Correct me if I'm wrong but the oldest text books on evolution goes back around 200/250 years ago. Why is it that we only have historical books ageing 3000 B.C and not earlier than that. By evolution we should have had text books ageing thousands and thousands of years. This earth should have been full of fossils everywhere if this was the case.

well put!

i asked the question in that other religious forum, the science forum and was given the answer that persons did not need to write things down because towns had not existed and therefore there was no need to record commercial transactions, as a consequence, no one wrote anything down for almost 100,000 years.