Evidence for God?

Originally posted by Suzianne
It doesn't. What it conflicts with is your narrow worldview.

It defintely conflicts with the way the Holy Bible says God made man and then breathed life into him. Evilutionists say man evolved from an ape creature. Show me a verse of scripture that says such a thing.

The Instructor

Originally posted by Penguin
Which is why the belief in such things is as sensible as the belief in Russell's Teapot or the invisible pink unicorn that lives in my fridge.

There is effectively, [b]no evidence for God.

--- Penguin.[/b]

Again, there is plenty of evidence for God. But not a spark of proof. What you seem to want is proof, not merely evidence.

Sorry, there's no cheat sheet for this test.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I was going to say that you're putting the cart before the horse here. But what is more true is that you are putting the cart behind the horse, but you're failing to hitch them up.

The point of free will and of my idea that there cannot be proof of God is to make man's choice bias-free and clearly his own choice. Just like you are not provided t ...[text shortened]... only possible, but meaningful. Why would He screw it all up at the last minute?

If you choose to believe the evilutionists, you are choosing to believe Satan.

The Instructor

Originally posted by RJHinds
It defintely conflicts with the way the Holy Bible says God made man and then breathed life into him. Evilutionists say man evolved from an ape creature. Show me a verse of scripture that says such a thing.

The Instructor

NO. What it conflicts with is the way YOU think the Holy Bible says God made man. The fact is, it doesn't say. You put such narrow definitions on the early chapters of Genesis that you find it impossible to think that God could have done it another way. Give God a break, would you? Let Him do it the way He wants, instead of insisting He did it the way YOU want.

Originally posted by RJHinds
If you choose to believe the evilutionists, you are choosing to believe Satan.

The Instructor

It's yet another demonstration of your limited capability for thought, if all you got from what I said was this 'throwaway' line about evolution, of all things. How you got that out of what I said, I cannot fathom. I thank God every day that He's not as focused on minutiae as you are.

Originally posted by Suzianne
[b]NO. What it conflicts with is the way YOU think the Holy Bible says God made man. The fact is, it doesn't say. You put such narrow definitions on the early chapters of Genesis that you find it impossible to think that God could have done it another way. Give God a break, would you? Let Him do it the way He wants, instead of insisting He did it the way YOU want.[/b]

This is what I see in the Holy Bible:

So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

(Genesis 1:27 NKJV)

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

(Genesis 2:7 NKJV)

Now show me were it says God made man from an ape.

The Instructor

Originally posted by Suzianne
It's yet another demonstration of your limited capability for thought, if all you got from what I said was this 'throwaway' line about evolution, of all things. How you got that out of what I said, I cannot fathom. I thank God every day that He's not as focused on minutiae as you are.

But God is focused on minutiae. Do yopu think God just poofed the orderly heavens and earth into existence to conform to precise laws without any need to focus on minutiae?

The Instructor

Originally posted by RJHinds
But God is focused on minutiae. Do yopu think God just poofed the orderly heavens and earth into existence to conform to precise laws without any need to focus on minutiae?

The Instructor

I meant He doesn't focus on minutiae to the exclusion of everything else, like you seem to do.

The Theory of Evolution is not going to keep anyone from the Kingdom of God all by itself.

And I don't think He 'poofed' anything into existence. Except maybe the primordial particle that became the Big Bang.

Originally posted by RJHinds
This is what I see in the Holy Bible:

[b]So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

(Genesis 1:27 NKJV)

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

(Genesis 2:7 NKJV)

Now show me were it says God made man from an ape.

The Instructor[/b]

The Bible also does not tell us precisely how the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, either. Yet we take it on faith that it did happen. I think, throughout the Bible, the HOW is not nearly as important as the WHY. And yet we fight tooth and nail over the HOW. Talk about missing the point.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I meant He doesn't focus on minutiae to the exclusion of everything else, like you seem to do.

The Theory of Evolution is not going to keep anyone from the Kingdom of God all by itself.

And I don't think He 'poofed' anything into existence. Except maybe the primordial particle that became the Big Bang.

Oh no! Don't tell me you believe in the Big Bang Theory.

And Elijah came to all the people, and said, “How long will you falter between two opinions? If the Lord is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him.”

(1 Kings 18:21 NKJV)

The Instructor

Originally posted by Suzianne
The Bible also does not tell us precisely how the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, either. Yet we take it on faith that it did happen. I think, throughout the Bible, the HOW is not nearly as important as the WHY. And yet we fight tooth and nail over the HOW. Talk about missing the point.

Well at least you don't believe Mary was impregnated by an ape or do you?

The Instructor

Originally posted by Suzianne
Again, there is plenty of evidence for God. But not a spark of proof. What you seem to want is proof, not merely evidence.

Sorry, there's no cheat sheet for this test.

Well, as I mentioned earlier, evidence for a god (even if there were any) is almost irrelevant unless it helps you to determine which god.

As you used a capital 'G', I assume you mean the Christian God.

And earlier I asked if a single piece of evidence could be presented for the Christian God being the one true God which could not, with the appropriate modifications, be claimed with equal validity by plenty of other religions. I was happy to accept that this would not amount to proof.

However, not one piece of evidence has been presented yet. There have been a few vague mutterings about prophecies, RJ came up with the Turin Shroud, but nothing that met the terms of my enquiry.

Unfortunately, most posters could not seem to understand that 'Why I believe in the Christian God' and 'Evidence for the Christian God' are not the same thing.

So I would argue that there is no proof, but also no evidence.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
Well, as I mentioned earlier, evidence for a god (even if there were any) is almost irrelevant unless it helps you to determine which god.

As you used a capital 'G', I assume you mean the Christian God.

And earlier I asked if a single piece of evidence could be presented for the Christian God being the one true God which could not, with the appro are not the same thing.

So I would argue that there is no proof, but also no evidence.

I will take it that you would accept a witness' testimony as admissible evidence, since every court that I know of would consider it thus.

Therefore, we have the four Gospels, as presented in the New Testament as being admissible witness testimony of miracles performed by the Son of God, one Jesus of Nazareth.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
Well, as I mentioned earlier, evidence for a god (even if there were any) is almost irrelevant unless it helps you to determine which god.

As you used a capital 'G', I assume you mean the Christian God.

And earlier I asked if a single piece of evidence could be presented for the Christian God being the one true God which could not, with the appro ...[text shortened]... are not the same thing.

So I would argue that there is no proof, but also no evidence.

Jesus claimed to be the sinless son of man and the only begotten Son of God. Jesus claimed to be the way, the truth, and the life and then died and rose from the dead to prove His claim. We have the Shroud of Turin as evidence.

Muhammad claimed to be a sinful man and a prophet of Allah. Muhammad died and stayed dead as proof of his claim.

I accept the evidence of Jesus over any other religious leader.

You may require God to come down from heaven and smack you upside the head as evidence. But God does not have to respond to your requirements. I believe God has provided all the evidence that He intends to provide this evil and adulterous generation. It is your responsibility to seek it out. It will not be given to you on a silver platter.

The Instructor

Originally posted by RJHinds
Oh no! Don't tell me you believe in the Big Bang Theory.

[b]And Elijah came to all the people, and said, “How long will you falter between two opinions? If the Lord is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him.”

(1 Kings 18:21 NKJV)

The Instructor[/b]

I do not falter between two opinions.

If you believe that God can do anything, why is it so out of the realm of possibility to you to think that God could not have created an infinitely dense particle, sort of a "universe-in-a-box" that became the Big Bang and created everything everywhere, including spacetime and our set of physical laws? Why would you place limits on God?